Handbook for Bio-waste Management in Macedonia

Transcription

1 Handbook for Bio-waste Management in Macedonia

2 Colophon Project title Preparation of program and feasibility study for decreasing the bio-waste on landfills Project G2G10/MK/6/2 number Version 31 August 2012 Location Project manager Address Number of annexes Authors Utrecht, The Netherlands Eugene Gies Croeselaan BJ Utrecht Tel eugene.gies@agentschapnl.nl 5 Marc Maassen (GAD), Herman Huisman (AgNL), Ruurd van Schaik (VAR), Ana Karanfilova- Maznevska, Filip Ivanov (MoEPP), Konstantin Siderovski (Empiria EMS) 2

3 Table of Contents FOREWORD... 6 ABBREVIATIONS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS ACTION PLANNING OF BIO-WASTE MANAGEMENT IN MACEDONIA COMPOST QUALITY AND MARKETING TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES GENERATION AND SEPARATE COLLECTION SYSTEMS OF BIO-WASTE RELEVANT EU AND MACEDONIAN LEGISLATION RELATED TO BIO-WASTE MANAGEMENT EUROPEAN LEGISLATION AND POLICIES CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS TOWARDS A BIO-WASTE DIRECTIVE MACEDONIAN LEGISLATION RELATED TO BIO-WASTE MANAGEMENT ASSESSMENT ON THE AMOUNT OF BIO-WASTE IN MACEDONIA BACKGROUND GENERAL MUNICIPAL WASTE MANAGEMENT SITUATION IN MACEDONIA WASTE ANALYSIS IN MACEDONIA QUESTIONNAIRE WASTE DATA STRATEGIES FOR MUNICIPAL WASTE COLLECTION AND TREATMENT INFRASTRUCTURE FOR SEPARATE COLLECTION SYSTEMS OF BIO-WASTE STRATEGIES FOR MUNICIPAL WASTE COLLECTION AND TREATMENT QUESTIONNAIRE WASTE DATA TYPES OF BIO-WASTE STREAMS DATA ON THE GENERATION OF BIO-WASTE IN EU COUNTRIES APPROACHES FOR BIO-WASTE COLLECTION SCHEMES FOR SEPARATE COLLECTION OF BIO-WASTE TOOLS FOR SEPARATE COLLECTION STABILIZATION OF HOME COMPOSTING COSTS FOR SEPARATE COLLECTION SYSTEMS AND HOME COMPOSTING COMMUNICATION ON SEPARATE COLLECTION COMMUNICATION CAMPAIGNS ON HOME COMPOSTING BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT SYSTEMS FOR BIO-WASTE INTRODUCTION STARTING POINTS FOR BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT OF BIO-WASTE AEROBIC AND ANAEROBIC TREATMENT OF BIO-WASTE COMPOSTING DESCRIPTION OF COMPOSTING SYSTEMS COSTS OF COMPOSTING ANAEROBIC DIGESTION COMPOST: MARKETS FOR APPLICATION, STANDARDS AND CERTIFICATION INTRODUCTION LEGAL STANDARDS FOR COMPOST COMPOST USE AND MARKETS COMPOST MARKETING AND NEED FOR A QUALITY ASSURANCE SYSTEM QUALITY ASSURANCE SYSTEM POSITIVE LIST OF BIO-WASTE SUITABLE FOR BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT OUTLINE OF THE MACEDONIAN WASTE MANAGEMENT ACTION PLAN DUTCH PRACTICES OF BIO-WASTE MANAGEMENT

4 9 REFERENCES AND INTERNET LINKS WEBSITES REFERENCES ANNEX 1 BIO-WASTE ACTION PROGRAM: HOW TO ESTABLISHING A NATIONAL PROGRAM FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF BIO-WASTE MANAGEMENT 101 DEVELOPMENT IN DUTCH BIO-WASTE MANAGEMENT FEATURES OF THE DUTCH BIO-WASTE ACTION PROGRAM DRIVERS AND BARRIERS FOR INTRODUCTION OF BIO-WASTE MANAGEMENT ANNEX 2 SECTOR PLANS OF THE DUTCH WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN 2009/2021 RELATED TO BIO-WASTE SECTOR PLAN 6: SEPARATELY COLLECTED VEGETABLE-, FRUIT- AND GARDEN WASTE FROM HOUSEHOLDS SECTOR PLAN 7: SEPARATELY COLLECTED ORGANIC WASTE FROM TRADE, SERVICES AND GOVERNMENT SECTOR PLAN 8: SEPARATELY COLLECTED GREEN WASTE SECTOR PLAN 65: ANIMAL WASTE ANNEX 3 INFORMATION ON FOOD WASTE PREVENTION PROGRAMS FOOD WASTE PREVENTION IN THE NETHERLANDS FOOD WASTE PREVENTION IN UK ANNEX 4 PERMITTING AND INSPECTION OF OUTDOOR COMPOSTING FACILITIES ANNEX 5 BIO-WASTE ASSESSMENT IN MACEDONIA List of Tables TABLE 1-1. HEAVY METAL (MG/KG OF DRY MATTER) OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF MSW-DERIVED COMPOSTS TABLE 1-2. HEAVY METAL LIMITS IN VARIOUS EU COUNTRIES (MG/KG DRY MATTER) TABLE 1-3. HYGIENIC REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPOST TABLE 1-4. BIO-WASTE TREATMENT METHODS TABLE 1-5. BIO-WASTE COLLECTION APPROACH IN INNER CITIES TABLE 1-6. BIO-WASTE COLLECTION APPROACH IN SUBURBS TABLE 1-7. BIO-WASTE COLLECTION APPROACH IN RURAL AREAS TABLE 3-1. MUNICIPAL WASTE MANAGEMENT AND COLLECTION TABLE 3-2. TOTAL MUNICIPAL WASTE GENERATION AND COMPOSITION YEAR TABLE 3-3. COMPOSITION OF HOUSEHOLD WASTE, COMMERCIAL WASTE AND TOTAL WASTE IN MACEDONIA TABLE 3-4. SPECIFIC WASTE PER AREA OF INVESTIGATION TABLE 3-5. BIOWASTE WASTE QUANTITIES RESUME TABLE 4-1. MAIN TREATMENT METHODS TABLE 4-2. RECOVERED PRODUCTS, AVOIDED PRODUCTS AND REMAINING WASTE STREAMS TABLE 5-1. MATERIALS FALLING UNDER THE DEFINITION OF BIO-WASTE TABLE 5-2. BIO-WASTE COLLECTION APPROACH IN INNER CITIES TABLE 5-3. BIO-WASTE COLLECTION APPROACH IN SUBURBS TABLE 5-4. BIO-WASTE COLLECTION APPROACH IN RURAL AREAS TABLE 5-5. BINS, BAGS AND BUCKETS APPROPRIATE FOR SEPARATE COLLECTION OF FOOD WASTE.. 47 TABLE 5-6. COLLECTION TOOLS FOR FOOD-WASTE (DOOR TO DOOR COLLECTION SCHEMES) TABLE 5-7. OVERVIEW OF TOOLS FOR RESIDUAL-WASTE COLLECTION TABLE 5-8. BINS AND BAGS: COMPARISON OF ADVANTAGES (+) AND DRAWBACKS (-) TABLE 5-9. TYPICAL TOOLS FOR PERFORMING HOME-COMPOSTING TABLE 6-1. COMPARISON OF COMPOSTING AND DIGESTION TABLE 7-1. CLASSIFICATION OF COMPOST QUALITY IN EUROPE

5 TABLE 7-2. HEAVY METAL LIMITS IN VARIOUS EU COUNTRIES (MG/KG DRY MATTER) TABLE 7-3. LIMIT VALUES FOR HEAVY METALS IN SOIL, IN SLUDGE FOR USE AND ANNUAL LOAD FOR USE IN AGRICULTURE TABLE 7-4. LIMIT VALUES FOR HEAVY METALS IN SEWAGE SLUDGE IN USA (MG/KG DM) TABLE 7-5. HEAVY METAL (MG/KG OF DRY MATTER) OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF MSW-DERIVED COMPOSTS TABLE 7-6. MARKET SHARES OF COMPOST SALES IN EU (IN %); STATUS 1999 TO TABLE 7-7. COMPOST QUALITY REQUIREMENTS FOR KEURCOMPOST TABLE 7-8. EXAMPLES OF SUITABLE WASTE FOR BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT TABLE 8-1. BIO-WASTE MANAGEMENT ACTION PLAN FOR THE 4-YEAR PERIOD TABLE 8-2. AMOUNT OF BIODEGRADABLE COMPONENTS IN THE MUNICIPAL WASTE THAT CAN BE DISPOSED AT ALL LANDFILLS IN THE REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA AT ANNUAL LEVEL TABLE ANNEX 5-1. DIVISION OF GROUPS IN ORDER TO SELECT THE MUNICIPALITIES TABLE ANNEX 5-2. WASTE GENERATION RATES OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE IN MACEDONIA TABLE ANNEX 5-3. COMPOSITION OF HOUSEHOLD WASTE, COMMERCIAL WASTE AND TOTAL WASTE IN MACEDONIA TABLE ANNEX 5-4. SPECIFIC WASTE DENSITY PER AREA OF INVESTIGATION TABLE ANNEX 5-5. QUESTIONNAIRE BIO-WASTE DATA PER MUNICIPALITY TABLE ANNEX 5-6. BIO-WASTE WASTE QUANTITIES RESUME List of Figures FIGURE 3-1. COMPOSITION OF THE TOTAL MUNICIPAL (HOUSEHOLD AND COMMERCIAL) WASTE FIGURE 4-1. STRATEGIES FOR MUNICIPAL WASTE MANAGEMENT FIGURE 5-1. PROSPERITY AND ORGANICS WASTE POTENTIAL IN CITIES (KG/CAP/YR) FIGURE 5-2. VEHICLES FOR THE DOOR TO DOOR COLLECTION OF FOOD WASTE FIGURE 5-3. COMPOSTER FOR HOME COMPOSTING FIGURE 6-1. PATHWAYS OF MICROBIAL DEGRADATION OF ORGANIC MATTER BY AEROBIC COMPOSTING AND ANAEROBIC DIGESTION FIGURE 6-2. SUITABILITY OF ORGANIC WASTES FOR AEROBIC COMPOSTING AND ANAEROBIC DIGESTION FIGURE 6-3. GENERAL SCHEME OF THE COMPOSTING PROCESS FIGURE 6-4. WINDROW WITH TURNER AND FORCED AERATION FIGURE 6-5. THE COVER SYSTEM FIGURE 6-6. THE OPEN CELL SYSTEM FIGURE 6-7. THE CONTAINER SYSTEM FIGURE 6-8. THE TUNNEL COMPOSTING SYSTEM FIGURE 6-9. HALL COMPOSTING FIGURE 7-1. COMPOST MARKETING HIERARCHY INDICATING MARKET PRICES AND VOLUMES (NOTE: PRICES ARE KNOWN RANGES FOR COMPOST PRODUCTS WITHIN THE MARKET SEGMENT, IN /M³) FIGURE 7-2. ELEMENTS OF QUALITY ASSURANCE SCHEMES FOR COMPOST FIGURE ANNEX 1-1. DEVELOPMENT OF SEPARATE COLLECTION OF BIO-WASTE IN THE NETHERLANDS FROM (GREEN BAR: BIO-WASTE FROM HOUSEHOLDS; YELLOW BAR: BULKY GREEN WASTE FROM HOUSEHOLDS) FIGURE ANNEX 1-2. MARKETS OF BIO-WASTE COMPOST IN THE NETHERLANDS (YEAR 2007) FIGURE ANNEX 5-1. COMPARISON OF MACEDONIA AND NEW EU COUNTRIES

6 Foreword Within the framework of the G2G.nl-short Programme Environmental Facility the project Preparation of program and feasibility study for decreasing the bio-waste on landfills, G2G10/MK/6/2 was executed by the Dutch project team. Together with the Macedonian beneficiaries strategies and actions were explored to establish a waste management infrastructure on regional level for separate collection and treatment of bio-waste. As indicated in the project implementation plan and agreed on with the Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning (MoEPP), the project will deliver a manual for MoEPP and municipalities that describes guidelines for separate collection and treatment of bio-waste together with standards for compost and marketing of compost. The guidelines are the result of the documents prepared by the Dutch team, reviewed by the Macedonian beneficiaries and discussed during the workshops with relevant stakeholders. The guideline is divided in two sections: - Section I: an executive summary and recommendations on what actions should be taken on national and municipal level to have a successful implementation of biowaste management - Section II contains the background documents on the following topics: 1. Bio-waste management: EU and Macedonian legislations; 2. Strategies for municipal waste collection and treatment; 3. Separate collection systems for bio-waste; 4. Biological treatment system; 5. Compost application; Section I will be to the point and practical in order to guarantee that it will be read and used by local authorities. As agreed on with MoEPP the manual is supplemented with review documents for background information, provided in section II. The concept of bio-waste as used in this manual is more restrictive than the concept of biodegradable waste as defined in the Landfill Directive: - Bio-waste is defined in The Waste Framework Directive as biodegradable garden and park waste, food and kitchen waste from households, restaurants, caterers and retail premises and comparable waste from food processing plants, while - Biodegradable waste is defined in the Landfill Directive (1999/31/EC) as "any waste that is capable of undergoing anaerobic or aerobic decomposition, such as food and green waste, and paper and paperboard". Based on the project outcomes, it is strongly recommended to start bio-waste management with organic waste streams that are easy to collect and which are clean, i.e. organic waste streams from green parks and markets. These organic waste streams can be compost in simple and low-cost outdoor composting facilities located at or close to landfill sites. Next to this, the marketing of this compost has to be established. After this, other organic waste streams from households and other institutions can be covered and indoor composting can be started. Collection of kitchen waste from households in the inner cities and anaerobic digestion is very difficult to establish as was shown in several Western European member states and should only be initiated in a later stage. The best thing is to start a pilot project with the separate collection of bio-waste and realise a small scale composting plant with a capacity of to tons a year. Therefore we recommend to continue the project together with GAD to organise inter municipal co-operation to be able to create technically better opportunities for separate collection and also at lower prices for the municipalities and civilians. 6

7 Abbreviations ABP AD CHP (units) EC ECN ECN-QAS EU IPPC JRC-IPTS LCA LCT LD MBT MCC MoAFWE MoEPP animal by-products anaerobic digestion combined heat and power (units) European Commission European Compost Network European Quality Assurance Scheme European Union Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (Directive) Institute for Prospective Technological Studies of the European Commission Joint Research Centre Life Cycle Assessment Life Cycle Thinking Landfill Directive mechanical biological treatment municipal collection centers Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Economy Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning MoEPP-PRO Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning Public Relation Office MoF MSW n/a NEAP OFMSW ORBIT QASs WFD Ministry of Finance municipal solid waste(s) not available National Environmental Action Plan organic fraction of municipal solid waste Organic Recovery & Biological Treatment Association Quality Assurance Systems Waste Framework Directive 7

8 SECTION I Executive summary & Recommendations 8

9 1 Executive summary and Recommendations This chapter will give a summary of the chapters and recommendations for the Macedonian future on bio-waste management. These recommendations were discussed together with and by the Macedonian stakeholders in the final conference of 13 June Action planning of bio-waste management in Macedonia Institutional aspects Bio-waste management is part of the overall waste management system. Bio-waste management activities in Macedonia will be successful only on the grounds of a well-established waste management system on national, regional and local level, fulfilling the following conditions: a. Functioning separate collection of municipal waste with separation of domestic waste (paper, cardboard, plastics, metal, glass), construction and demolition waste, household hazardous waste, etc. b. Separate management and accounting for waste from households and waste from private and public entities. c. Waste charging system for households and businesses based on actual waste amounts and waste management costs, providing incentive for reducing amounts of waste by separate collection. d. Complete register of waste generating households, public and private entities, etc. e. Efficient and flexible waste monitoring system including maintenance of waste flow databases and reporting of waste flows. f. Extensive public education and awareness in support of new waste management programs, and the costs and benefits of those programs Priority waste streams Where to start bio-waste management? There are various waste streams and there are different types of housing. Two major streams were identified during the second workshop in april These all ask for their specific approach. Green waste from parks is easy to collect and treat in outdoor composting facilities. Household bio waste. The preferred technology for food waste is anaerobic digestion. The waste should be separately collected Action planning As emphasised many times by the Dutch experts during the workshops, follow a step-by-step approach as all stages of the bio-waste management chain have to be successful, i.e. collection, treatment and compost application. The following approach is advised: - Start with clean waste streams that are easily accessible: e.g. green waste from parks (eg Skopje Greenery) and possibly market waste. - Start with a small-scale, outdoor composting facility of approx ton - Farmers are less likely to see compost from green waste as waste in contrast to compost from food waste which will be less trusted by farmers. In the proceeding stages, other bio-waste streams can be collected and composted. As anaerobic digestion is a more advanced and complicated treatment process, it is advised to start this technology after composting of bio-waste is fully established. 9

10 Implementation of bio-waste management should be coordinated and stimulated at national level and be implemented at municipal level. This can be done by establishing a so-called Bio-waste Action Program to stimulate and coordinate research activities, expand processing capacity and promote use of high-quality compost. The program is coordinated at national level but the responsibility for implementation is left to the municipality. Although MoEPP should not fund implementation of local programs, it should set up a Bio-waste Information Centre to collect research data and act as a clearinghouse to assist municipalities. The Action Programme could or maybe should be combined with a start with inter municipal cooperation to enlarge the capacity and enable more techniques and last but not least keep control over prices for consumers/civilians. Targets of the Bio-waste Action Programme are: - Introduction of separate collection of bio-waste in all municipalities - Establish sufficient composting capacity - Realisation of a good quality of compost - Establish a market for the produced compost - Support of households Research can be done in the following areas: - On collection systems, quality-control, separation rules - On technological developments: conversion techniques (composting, anaerobic digestion), home-composting - On creating compost market: heavy metals, application research (compost in farming) - On sales potentials, sales organisation, publicity campaign - Communication program The Bio-waste Action Programme will have to establish that collection, treatment and compost marketing are in line. When one or more of these three basic stages fail, the complete bio-waste management system will collapse, as shown in the scheme below. Situation Collection Processing Marketing Optimum Collection quantity increases Collection quantity drops Collection = processing = sales= everybody happy Lack of processing capacity Dump of separate collected bio-waste Negative publicity Inhabitants lose confidence Negative motivation to separate biowaste Overcapacity Financial losses Investors lose confidence Collection drops quality Materials refused at gate dump of separate collected bio-waste negative publicity inhabitants lose confidence compost market lose confidence Composting quality drops Compost market lose confidence compost price goes down dump of overproduction inhabitants lose confidence Compost drops market Overproduction price dump financial losses dump of overproduction investors lose confidence inhabitants lose confidence negative motivation to separate bio-waste The Dutch Bio-waste Information Centre gave some examples of activities that were executed that was established to coordinate and stimulated bio-waste management: - Helpdesk for questions of municipalities, collecting and composting companies (10-15 questions/day) - Monitoring of data: e.g. how many municipalities have separate collection of bio-waste, which municipalities, system of collection - Monitoring composting capacity - Active communication: contact municipalities with each other, organise conferences - Providing detailed information by writing manuals for municipalities about e.g. communication to citizens, technical aspects of separate collection Communication tools of the Dutch Bio-waste Information Centre were: 10

11 - Regional conferences for municipalities - Regular newsletter with facts, figures and best practices (NB: this programme was running from 1990 until No internet was available in those days) - Practical guides for collection, communication, investments, separation rules - Best practices (communication, organisation of the introduction) - Information on technical developments, home composting - Technical manuals for investors: type of bio-waste treatment plants - Financial information - Support municipalities in cases of negative publicity 1.2 Compost quality and marketing Summary Compost from bio-waste can be used as soil improver and natural fertiliser. The biological conversion of bio-waste can be established by aerobic composting or anaerobic digestion. Advantages of the use of compost on arable land are that organic matter has a positive effect on the structure of the soil, organic matter has a nutritive function, and organic matter has a positive effect on the microbial activity. However, application of compost to the soil is also of great concern because the frequent supply of compost may lead to the accumulation of heavy metals (and possibly organic pollutants) and visible impurities in the soil. In this compost standards play a role. First, standards help to protect the environment through implementing what is effectively a precautionary approach to the regulation of compost and its application. Secondly, standards can constitute part of the system whereby the producers of compost can develop a more sound marketing strategy in the face of what are often negative perceptions of compost, and where some potentially important end-users may have little familiarity of the material. The starting material has a significant effect on the quality of the compost. Table 1 presents the heavy metal content of composts derived from municipal solid wastes (MSW) which were prepared in three different ways: - MSW compost: obtained from MSW which is integrally collected; the compost (organic fraction) is mechanically separated after composting; - OFMSW compost: obtained from MSW which is integrally collected; the organic fraction (OFMSW) is mechanically separated before composting; - bio-waste compost: obtained from the organic fraction of municipal solid waste which is separated at the source before composting. Table 1-1. Heavy metal (mg/kg of dry matter) of different types of MSW-derived composts Heavy metal MSW compost OFMSW compost Bio-waste compost Cd Cr Cu Ni Pb Zn Table 1-1 shows that heavy metals in compost are significantly reduced when the organic fraction is separated before composting. An even greater reduction is achieved when the organic fraction of MSW is source-separated before composting. This shows that composts derived from source segregated materials have much lower levels of contamination from potentially toxic elements, such as metals and organic pollutants. Moreover, MBT compost contains high levels of physical impurities such as glass and plastics that make the product less attractive for farmers. 11

12 There are significant differences on the market situation in the different EU countries. Generally it can be recognised that even in the developed countries with a circumstantial compost production like Germany the feared problems with compost sales did not occur. In all countries hobby gardening, horticulture and landscaping are successful markets and has good developing chances. Many investigations in Europe indicate that quality and marketing of the end product is the most crucial composting issue. Both producers and users are of the opinion that a sustainable recycling of organic wastes demands clear regulations regarding what is suitable to be recycled and how it should be managed and controlled. A well-founded quality assurance programme would definitely increase sustainable recycling of organic wastes. An effective bio-waste treatment has to include quality standards and their control in order to guarantee environmentally safe application and successful marketing and markets. On the basis of existing experiences in countries with running quality assurance schemes the European Compost Network (ECN) develops at present a European Quality Assurance Scheme (ECN-QAS) for compost. The ECN-QAS Quality Label can only be applied to compost which successfully meets the corresponding quality requirements. Value giving quality criteria are mainly defined by the content of organic matter, plant nutrients and liming value. Further specifications include physical properties, electrical conductivity and ph. An important criteria for the testing of the suitability for certain uses is the testing of plant response Recommendations 1. Only accept bio-waste as input material for compost The stabilised product of the organic fraction from MBT installations is of poor quality as it contains high levels of visible impurities (plastics, metals, glass, and stones) and high levels of pollutants such as heavy metals. Do not use the name Compost for the output of MBT as it will otherwise give compost a very poor image in the eyes of potential end-users. Output from MBT s should therefore be named accordingly: e.g. stabilised output from MBT. In the Netherlands and other countries such as Belgium and Germany it is not allowed to use stabilised output of MBT in agriculture. In the Netherlands, the stabilised output of MBT has to be landfilled. 2. The first criteria to be laid down in National legislation In the initial stage of establishment of a bio-waste management chain, the following standards for compost have to be laid down in legislation: - standards for heavy metals in compost - hygienic requirements according to Regulation on Animal By-Products (Regulation (EC) 1774/2002) It is safe to use the higher standards for heavy metals of the UK as other EU countries are in the same range and UK standards are at level 2 of the levels presented by Bart et al. (2008) 1 in the JRC report on end-of-waste criteria as shown in Table 1-2. Table 1-2. Heavy metal limits in various EU countries (mg/kg dry matter) Cd Cr Cu Hg Ni Pb Zn Level 1 low Level 2 medium Level 3 high UK Quality Label (BSI PAS 100) Barth et al (2008), Compost production and use in the EU, report to the European Commission, Joint Research Centre/ITPS, Final report 12

13 Hygienic requirements for compost and composting facilities are laid down in the Animal by- Products regulation (EC No. 1774/2002). The European Commission/DG is now continuing the work on the implementation rules of the revised Animal by-products Regulation. Currently the experts are working in a comitology procedure on the important annexes which include the specific requirements for the sanitisation in the practice of biological treatment (compost and biogas plants). For hygienic requirements it is safe to hygienic standards that are already in place in several EU countries as shown in Table 1-3. Table 1-3. Hygienic requirements for compost Country Hygienic requirement UK Temperature: 65 C for 7 days (not necessarily consecutive days) with a moisture content of 50%. The mixture should be turned at least 2 times where the batch remains static. Germany The compost plant must be able to prove the hygienic effectiveness which is normally done by a daily temperature recording. The temperature level has to show in open composting systems more than 55 C over two weeks or 65 C over one week, in closed systems one week with more than 60 C is sufficient. Austria During the regular decomposition process the temperature in the composted material has to reach 64 C over 4 days. Additionally it can be considered to have a direct hygienic test of the end product (compost) on Salmonella (and Escherichia coli). 3. Do not yet focus on the development of a Quality Assurance System In this stage of establishing a bio-waste management chain, do not yet focus on the development of a Quality Assurance System. This can be left to a later stage when the bio-waste management chain has been installed. The Quality Assurance System of the European Composting Network (QAS-ECN) can be used as a starting point for a Macedonian compost quality assurance system. 4. Actively involve the ministry of Agriculture from the start In the procedure of introducing the compost standard and establishing a bio-waste management chain involve the Ministry of Agriculture from the start, as agriculture is the major compost enduser. 1.3 Treatment technologies Summary The two principle ways of treating organic waste in an industrial setting is by composting and anaerobic digestion. With both systems there is sufficient experience all over Europe. This paragraph describes the different treatment technologies. Biological treatment of bio-waste can be carried out in different ways, from very simple to complex. Based on the EU-context, the basic requirements for treatment are the following: - If the waste contains kitchen or catering waste, the technology must comply with the animal by-products order. Higher than 70 o C for 2 hours, or 2 days higher than 60 o C or 5 days higher than 55 o C; 13

14 - Measures must be taken to avoid odour emissions. Air treatment, aeration, closed acceptation; - Good quality end product. Mature compost, no visible pollution, low on heavy metals; - No emission of polluted water. Bio-waste can either be treated under conditions with oxygen (aerobic) or without oxygen (anaerobic). Both methods have its advantages and disadvantages. The biggest advantage of anaerobic digestion (AD) is that besides compost also energy (biogas, electricity, heat) is produced. The advantage of aerobic treatment (composting) is that it is relatively simple. In Table 1-4 below we compare the two methods. Table 1-4. Bio-waste treatment methods Aerobic Composting Needs oxygen Costs energy (from 10 to 35 kwh per ton) Temperature scale from 35 to 65 C Produces heat Open or closed Minimum 2 phases Investment and running costs relatively low Anaerobic Digestion No oxygen Produces energy Either a mesophilic process (38 C) or a thermophilic process (55 C) Needs heat Closed 1 AD phase, 1 composting phase Higher investment and running costs In general, composting is used for dry waste streams such as green waste and bio-waste. Anaerobic digestion is often used for kitchen, waste food waste and also for bio-waste. Anaerobic digestion is more complex and expensive, as it has to take place under closed airtight circumstances and the process itself is more vulnerable. Composting Composting is a controlled aerobic process under thermophilic circumstances (T = C). Due to this process organic matter breaks down to stable compost. In industrial installations, this process takes 3 to 10 weeks. The limiting conditions for a good composting process are the following: - Aerobic circumstances: anaerobic spots slow the process down and cause odour problems; - Water content of about 50%. If the bio-waste is too wet, the oxygen exchange is too little, when it is too dry there is insufficient bacterial activity; - C/N-ratio between 20 and 30. This means that the bio-waste must be standardised before it is brought to the composting facility. In general this is done by mixing the fresh waste with structure material like screen overflow and woody green waste. 14

15 Composting takes generally place in the following steps: Acceptance and Pre-treatment Structure material Pre-composting Structure material Intermediate treatment Final composting Final treatment Metals Compost Plastic, stones, etc Receptions, pre-treatment and screening are normally carried out in a closed hall. These premises are kept at a negative pressure and the air that comes out is treated in bio-filters. The composting takes place under controlled circumstances with forced aeration. It is impossible to discuss all existing composting systems. We have chosen some main systems. Most other systems are derived from these systems. The degree of automation depends very much on the size of the installation and of the wishes from the client. In small scale installations the pretreatment and screening can be carried out by a shovel and a mobile drum screen. In larger installations it is necessary to design and to build full-size treatment plants. The following composting systems are described: - Windrow composting; This is an open system. The waste is stacked in long heaps (windrows) and turned regularly. Sometimes the windrows are aerated through a system with gutters and fans. This system works well for green waste, but should not be applied for bio-waste, while the process air is not treated. - Cover-system; This is an open system. The waste is turned regularly and is covered with a sheet. Aeration is achieved by forced aeration and by turning. Odour emissions are avoided by the cover. Composting time 8 to 9 weeks. - Open Cell-system; The composting takes place in (semi) open cells. Aeration takes place by drawing the air through the heap. This way no emissions take place. The air is captured and cleaned in a fully automated air treatment system with biofilters. Composting time about 8 weeks. - Tunnel composting; The bio-waste is treated in closed tunnels. The air is pushed through the waste and recirculated. A very intensive and fully automated process. Process air is treated in scrubbers and biofilters. Composting time 3 to 5 weeks. - Hall composting; This is a windrow system inside a closed hall. Often the waste is turned with an automatic turner. Air is pushed through the windrows and treated in scrubbers and biofilters. Composting time 8 to 10 weeks. 15

16 It is not possible to compare the different systems on investment costs and operational (running) costs only. What is the best system depends very much on the amounts of waste and the local situation. In general the Cover-system has the lowest investment costs. But if there is only little space available, or the ground prices are high, a tunnel-system might be a better solution. The amount of waste also has a great influence on the price. With large quantities of waste it is possible to invest more. The Open Cell-system and the Cover-system can both be designed for relatively small and large amounts of waste. A Tunnel system is suited for waste quantities above t/a. The treatment costs for the different system are estimated as follows (Western European prices): System Estimated costs ( /ton) Windrow-system Cover-system Open Cell-system Tunnel-system Hall composting Anaerobic digestion Anaerobic digestion takes place under mesophilic (38 C) or thermophilic (55 C) conditions. To favour a good sanitation of the waste, most systems for bio-waste work under thermophilic circumstances. The end products of AD are biogas and digestate. This digestate contains much water and ammonium. It must therefore be composted afterwards in one of the systems as described previously. The big advantage of AD is the production of biogas. Whether investing in AD is profitable depends very much on the tariffs for green energy. The limiting conditions for AD are the following: - Anaerobic circumstances - Temperature 38 C or 55 C - ph Water content depends on the system - Structure material to favour the circulation of gas and water - Inoculation with micro organisms The bio-waste must be standardized before it is brought inside the AD-plant. It is often shredded and mixed with sludge and d in order to inoculate it with micro organisms. The following steps are usually taken in an AD-plant. The process takes about 3 weeks. After this a composting process of 3 to 5 weeks is needed to turn the material into compost. There are two main systems for AD: a wet system ( 5 to 20% of dry matter) and a dry system (30 to 40% of dry matter). The problem with AD of bio-waste is the inert fraction. In a wet system this settles in the digestion tank. This means that the inert fraction must be washed out before it enters the tank. In a dry system, the inert material stays connected to the organic matter, and works itself through the reactor. There is also a choice between batch reactors and plug flow reactors. Pre treatment depends very much on the system and the kind of waste. Bio-waste is usually shredded and mixed with d in order to inoculate it with the right micro-organisms. If the input stream is wet food and restaurant waste, it is only mixed with digestate. As the different possibilities show, AD is a much more complex process than composting. This is due to the fact that the process takes place under anaerobic conditions and because the limiting conditions are much more critical. In most cases the biogas is transformed into electricity and heat in a co-generation plant. Other options are the production of heat that can be used in district heating plants or the isolation of the methane. This can be inserted in the natural gas grid or be used as transport gas. The choice of the system depends very much on the kind of waste and on the local situation. In general there are three main system: 16

17 - Wet fermentation systems; This is mainly used for sludge, manure and food waste. If this system is used for bio-waste an extensive pre treatment is needed. The gas yield is in general high. - Tunnel systems; This is a batch system, where anaerobic circumstances are created inside a tunnel. So with every batch the anaerobic digestion is started up en stopped after two to three weeks. Another tunnel system is that the material inside the tunnel is humidified and that the percolation water is digested. The tunnel systems are relatively cheap, but the gas yields are lower that with the other systems. - Dry fermentation systems; These systems are especially design for bio-waste like input streams. After a pre treatment the material is digested in a reactor. The sandy fraction stays connected to the organic matter. These systems have a high gas yield, but the investment costs are also high. The costs for AD depend very much on the local situation. The cheapest system is wet fermentation for waste with high moisture content. Also the local legislation play a big role. Of major importance is how the digestate can be used afterwards. Can it be brought on the land directly, must it be dewatered and composted and what to do with the press water, etc. Talking about bio-waste, the costs for a tunnel system are relatively low, but the gas yield are also lower than with the other systems. All systems are proven technologies. The choice of a system depends on the local situation and on the total business case. In Western Europe green energy is subsidised, so much emphasis is laid on the gas yield. If this is not the case, one should concentrate on cost reduction Recommendations Treatment of bio-waste is relatively new in Macedonia and organic waste streams are not yet available in large quantities. We recommend that municipalities concentrate on organic waste that is already produced separately, like green waste. This waste can be treated in a simple way by windrow composting system or the described cover system. Other waste streams like market waste, bio-waste and the organic fraction out of MSW can best be treated in an Open Cell or Tunnel system. The hall composting is too expensive. The choice between an Open Cell system or Tunnel system depends on the local situation. In general the investment costs and running costs of an Open Cell system are lower than of a tunnel composting. A tunnel composting is advised when not much space is available or when the installation must be placed close to housing or an industrial area. The best thing is to start a pilot project with the separate collection of bio-waste and realise a small scale composting plant with a capacity of to tons a year. Such a project will give valuable information for the municipalities in Macedonia on all aspects of collecting and composting. We don t recommend the realisation of an anaerobic digestion plant for the treatment of bio-waste in Macedonia yet. It is best first to get experience with a more simple process like composting. Anaerobic digestion could be developed for the treatment of wet waste streams like residues from the food industry. For the treatment of these streams, the simple technology of wet fermentation could be used. 17

18 1.4 Generation and separate collection systems of bio-waste Summary Current status of bio-waste management in Macedonia Bio-waste management in Macedonia is at an initial stage of development. In the period in a number of municipalities different initiatives have been carried out on separate collection and composting of bio-waste. The results are partial and did not resulted in the introduction of permanent bio-waste collection practices on municipal level. In the greater part of the municipalities the bio-waste are not collected separately but as part of the mixed municipal waste. Separate collection is carried out only for green waste from public parks, gardens and the greenness along the roads. This waste is only transported separately and is landfilled at the municipal waste landfills. In several municipalities there are specific sites for green waste composting. There the green waste is collected without pre-treatment. This makes the composting process too long. Based on the information gathered in this project, it can be concluded that at present in the greater part of the municipalities there are no intensive activities on separate collection and treatment of bio-waste. Most common reasons for this are lack of financial resources and administrative capacity, lack of installations and sites in the municipalities for bio-waste treatment. Introduction of separate collection and treatment of this waste stream at present is not a priority for the municipalities and is left for a later stage, together with the construction of the new regional landfills or when the existing ones are extended. Approach to separate collection of bio-waste The amount of bio-waste from households is the result of the socio-economic level of the population. Lower life standards in the villages and most of the towns reduce the bio-waste quantity to minimum. In the rural regions the bio-wastes from foodstuffs are used, and most probably will be used for many years, for feeding the livestock, while the shavings from the fruit-trees and some of the packages are burned. The residual bio-waste of the city households varies according to the size of the towns. Since the mid-nineties the separate collection an utilization of bio waste forms part of waste management practices in almost all Dutch, German, Swiss municipalities. In terms of amounts and quality of bio-waste collection, there are differences when looking at the three main types of dwelling structures (inner cities, suburbs of villages, rural areas). Based on the differentiation in dwelling structures and bio-waste streams in Macedonia, the first approach to separate collection can be made. For the Macedonian situation the following amounts of biodegradable waste per dwelling structure are reported (based on the Research done by SGS Institut Fresenius GmbH in March 2006): Rural Suburbs Inner city Population < > Amount of biodegradable waste (kg/cap/year) These numbers include both the bio-waste from households and from commercial activities (together municipal wastes). Bio-waste collection in inner cities. The higher the number of families living in a housing and using centralized bins for separation, the lower is the quality of the separated recyclables and biowaste. Another option for bio-waste collection in the inner is from areas with high concentration of 18

19 restaurants, canteens, food shops, etc. This can be organized by providing the restaurants and food shops with bio-waste containers for separate collection of food waste. Experiences in bio-waste collection in inner cities show that the recovery rate of organics in bio-waste is roughly 30%, meaning 20 kg/cap/year. This is the result of 30% of the inhabitants participating in the separate collection, while 70% do not participate. Home composting is in any case the basic instrument for managing garden waste; it might be also collected at the doorstep, but only by charging for that service. This can effectively be managed by selling paper bags by the municipalities to the households, in which the garden waste must be provided at the curb side on demand. Table 1-5. Bio-waste collection approach in inner cities Food waste Separate collection Home composting Municipal collection centre Yes (door-to-door) Garden waste On demand only yes Yes Bio-waste collection in suburbs and villages. People living in suburbs and villages often live in single family houses. They are often taking care of their own garden and have a higher awareness of nature, soil, plants, compost and nutrients, therefore making them more accessible for the idea of bio-waste collection and the production of compost. A relevant share of the garden waste is selfcomposted, but due to a number of reasons backyard composting in suburbs does not reach the efficiency of rural areas. Home-composting should be used as a tool for both food and garden waste management in those areas with detached and semidetached settlings. Families living in apartments and flats (high-rise buildings) should be served by a specific collection for food waste. Garden waste is separately collected predominantly at municipal collection centres, it might be also be collected at the doorstep on demand, but only by charging for that service. Table 1-6. Bio-waste collection approach in suburbs Separate collection Home composting Municipal collection centre Food waste Yes (only high-rise yes buildings) Garden waste no yes Yes Bio-waste collection in rural areas. Experience has shown that very low amounts of organics are discovered in the remaining waste from rural area. This very low amount is due to highly efficient traditional home composting in rural areas. The main task in rural areas is therefore not a reduction of organics, since maintaining the actual status would already be a success. However, experience shows that organics increase even in rural areas with developing welfare. A motivational campaign in rural areas should help to maintain backyard composting and animal feeding. A limited number of households, either not willing to do home-composting or living in flats, can be provided with a separate collection scheme. In these situations cooperation with local farmers and decentralized composting should be considered first. Table 1-7. Bio-waste collection approach in rural areas Separate collection Home composting Municipal collection centre Food waste No yes Garden waste No yes for large amounts only 19

20 Costs of separate collection of bio-wastes The costs of implementing separate collection schemes are not straightforward to identify, not least because the options available are numerous with some being more expensive than others. It is important to note that there are numerous permutations available for bio-waste collection. These include the following: - Scope of materials collected can include any combination of garden waste and food waste, sometimes with cardboard included; - Frequency of collections of the bio-waste and the refuse can be such that frequencies are the same, or that the one is greater than the other. This affects the capture of the materials targeted, and the costs of the service; - Vehicles used can include compactors or non compacting trucks with varying loads. The choice reflects the scope of materials (and their bulk density), the frequency of the collection, and the nature of the area being serviced; - Containment methods may include bins, buckets, paper sacks, re-usable sacks, kitchen caddies and paper or starch-based liners, these affect the convenience of the service, and hence also, the capture, as well as being important cost items. One of the issues with the costs of collection systems is that whether or not the system increases the cost of collection (and the system) depends upon the choice of system. Whether or not adding a collection of food waste, or garden waste, or kitchen and garden waste, will add cost to the collection system also depends on what the system was like before. Although this sounds obvious, it is an important point since introducing collections of bio-waste offers the potential for optimization of collection schemes, especially where putrescible material is targeted. Hence, although it is possible for additional collection services to result in a significant increase in net collection costs, typically, this is a consequence of poor design of the collection service, and failure to optimize the service. Successful segregation of the food waste fraction can facilitate a reduction in the required frequency of residual waste collections. This already happens in various municipalities in a number of countries, and is an especially important consideration in hotter climates, where the climate demands more frequent collection of putrescible wastes (though this frequency reduction effect is by no means confined to Southern Member States) Recommendations Separate collection of bio-waste represents a strategic choice in order to reach high recycling targets and to reduce the amount of bio-waste to be disposed. We believe that rather than collecting bio-wastes which can be treated at home through home composting, effort has to be made to find suitable systems that enable high recycling rates, without causing an increase in the overall MSW collected. Best practice cases in EU countries are effective in this regard if the collection scheme for bio-waste keeps the collection of food waste and that of garden waste separated. One scheme has to tackle only food waste as a whole (including cooked foods such as meat and fish), by means of small volume bins and buckets, whereas a different scheme tackles garden waste only. Collection of municipal green yard waste Municipal green yard waste are organic residues coming from public parks, cemeteries, street trees (leaves, twigs) as well as from private enterprises taking care of the garden/park areas of their clients. The operational advantage of this organic waste fraction is that it is already collected separately by own vehicles. Therefore, composting could be implemented as an effective first measure in the cities. Composting is quite simple, since green yard waste does not create any emissions as compared to bio-waste. This can be accompanied by general restrictions to deliver green yard waste to the local landfill. Of course the option must be provided to discharge green yard waste in a separate area close to the 20

21 landfill s entrance. Depending on the in the locale structures, the system can be extended by providing semi centralized for garden waste from private households or people can bring their own waste to the composting site. Collection schemes for garden waste The separate collection of garden waste is stimulated by the convenience of its collection. This may have the following consequences which, though generally negative, can be addressed: - A high delivery of garden waste into the collection system; - A high level of seasonality in the collected waste; - A disincentive to home-composting (if the collection is free); and - An increase in costs resulting from the high delivery of material; - The general outcome is a high recycling rate, but the overall MSW arising figures are much higher as well (an additional weight of more than 100kg per inhabitant may be expected). Hence an increase in costs resulting from the high delivery of material is to be expected. In an attempt to address previous mentioned undesirable effects of intensive door-to-door collections and uncontrolled bring schemes by means of road containers, to realize an effective scheme for garden-waste management priority should be given to: 1. Promotion and enhancement of home-composting: as long as households are not provided with free garden waste collections, they can be encouraged to try backyard composting, or to maintain such behaviour in those many places where such composting is already widely practiced.; 2. Bring schemes, collecting garden-waste at municipal collection centers (MCC), representing a relatively low-cost collection system for municipalities, even if the recycling (composting) will represent an additional cost; 3. Collection at the door-step; in order to help people who find it troublesome to go to MCC (for instance due to lack of space in their car, or whatever the problem) a collection at the doorstep can be run, with a specific round ( green circuit ). It is advisable to do this only in specific seasons and with a much lower frequency of collection than that of kitchen waste. (i.e. monthly or less). A general rule for municipalities should be that where there are lawn cuttings, there is a garden in which home composting could be performed. The purpose should then be to adopt a collection system which does not make it too easy for households to deliver their garden waste. This is why it makes sense to keep the collection of garden waste separate from the collection of kitchen waste. Collection schemes for food waste Running source separation for food waste, both at households and for large producers, implies the need for tools to face problems linked to the specific features of such a material. These include its fermentable nature and its high moisture content. In this respect, a service which is comfortable, and where households are provided with tools to avoid nuisance, will result in enhanced participation and will thus result in a higher collection quantity/quality. These issues have to be best tackled through: - a relatively intensive collection schedule (intensifying frequencies depending on seasons and/or type of dwellings); - the use, in most cases, of collection systems at the doorstep so as to have them more user-friendly and enhance the participation rate. - the use of watertight, transparent receptacles to confine the waste ( Biobags ). Intensive collection schemes for food waste imply that each waste producer (family, shops, private enterprise) must be equipped with specific tools (bags, buckets, wheel-bins) that can be used to easily manage putrescible materials (including cooked substances such as meat, fish, soups, food scraps, etc). 21

22 SECTION II Background documents 22

23 2 Relevant EU and Macedonian legislation related to biowaste management 2.1 European legislation and policies This paragraph gives a brief overview of the legislation that is relevant or related to the management of bio-waste Relevant legislation and policies 1. Waste Framework Directive. Several articles of the new Waste Framework Directive (WFD) are important for bio-waste management: - Article 22 obliges Member States, as appropriate, to encourage the treatment of bio-waste following the waste treatment hierarchy by promoting separate collection with a view to the composting and digestion of bio-waste, by taking measures for the treatment of bio-waste in a way that fulfils a high level of environmental protection, and by stimulating the use of environmentally safe materials (e.g. composts) produced from bio-waste. In a crucial clause, the Commission is asked to carry out an assessment on the management of bio-waste with a view to submitting a proposal if appropriate. In this assessment the opportunity should be examined of setting minimum requirements for bio-waste management and quality criteria for compost and digestate from bio-waste. It is envisaged that this could end up in a Communication or in a specific bio-waste Directive or Regulation. - Article 11 introduces reuse and recycling targets. Bio-waste however is not included in the waste types that are to be collected separately or for which recycling targets have been established. However, Member States are allowed and encouraged to include more waste streams, to promote high quality recycling. To this end they can set up extra separate collection schemes of waste where this is technically, environmentally and economically practicable and appropriate to meet the necessary quality standards for the relevant recycling sectors. By 31 December 2014 at the latest the Commission itself shall examine the existing measures and targets and shall consider setting targets for other waste streams. - Article 6 specifies that certain specified waste shall cease to be waste when it has undergone a recovery, including recycling, operation and complies with specific criteria to be developed. The measures relating to the adoption of such criteria and specifying the waste shall be adopted using the comitology 2 procedure. End-of-waste specific criteria should be considered, among others, at least for aggregates, paper, glass, metal, tyres and textiles. 2. Landfill Directive. Article 5 of the Landfill Directive states that Member States should set up a national strategy for the implementation of the reduction of biodegradable waste going to landfills by means of recycling, composting, biogas production or materials/energy recovery. This strategy should ensure that not later than five years after the date of implementation biodegradable municipal waste going to landfills must be reduced to 75 % of the total amount of biodegradable municipal waste produced in After eight years this must be reduced to 50 % of this amount, and after 15 years to 35 %. Member States that landfilled more than 80 % of their collected municipal waste in 1995 may postpone the attainment of the targets by a period not exceeding four years. 2 Comitology: Comitology in the European Union refers to the committee system which oversees the delegated acts implemented by the European Commission. In accordance with Article 202 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (ECT), it is the task of the Commission to implement legislation at Community level. In practice, each legislative instrument specifies the scope of the implementing powers conferred on the Commission by the Council of the European Union. In this context, the Treaty provides for the Commission to be assisted by a committee, in line with the procedure known as "comitology". The committees are forums for discussion, consist of representatives from Member States and are chaired by the Commission. They enable the Commission to establish dialogue with national administrations before adopting implementing measures. The Commission ensures that measures reflect as far as possible the situation in each of the countries concerned. 23

24 3. End-of-waste criteria. JRC has finished a project to look at the scientific methodology that could be used to determine end of waste criteria. The objectives of the project were to: - Develop a general methodology for determining end of waste criteria (end of waste methodology) using three specific pilot case studies, including compost; - Methodology should be generally suitable for application to any candidate waste stream to determine (if any) end of waste criteria; - Propose further candidate waste streams for consideration based on standard selection criteria. - The report to DG ENV, including end-of-waste criteria for bio-waste, was published in However, specific criteria for end-of-waste were not yet mentioned in Article 6(2) End-ofwaste status of in the new Waste Framework Directive (2008/98/EC). - The Commission now intends to prepare end-of-waste criteria for ferrous scrap metal, aluminium scrap metal, copper scrap metal, paper and glass. The Joint Research Centre will conduct studies on each material stream to compile technical proposals for the end-of-waste criteria. This work will be accompanied by working groups on each waste stream with experts from Member States and stakeholders. - The first reports on aluminium scrap and ferrous scrap were published by JRC in May This procedure is not yet completed. For the latest information see and More information on the Comitology procedure for the topic of End-of-waste can be found at 4. Regulation on Animal By-Products (ABPR). The ABPR (Regulation (EC) 1774/2002) constitutes the cornerstone of European legislation on food safety. ABPR prohibits many animal by-products (ABP) from being disposed of directly to landfill. The Regulation categorises ABP into three categories, according to risk: - Category 1 - very high risk, i.e. animals suspected or confirmed as being infected by BSE (Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy); - Category 2 - high risk, i.e. condemned meat, fallen stock, manure, digestive tract content; - Category 3 - low risk, i.e. catering wastes, former foodstuffs and raw meat/fish from food manufacturers and food retailers. The APBR does not apply to catering waste, unless it is destined for animal consumption, destined for use in a biogas plant/composting or comes from means of transport operating internationally. Catering waste from means of transport operating internationally is part of Category 1 waste. However, Article 4 also requires Member States to take the necessary measures to ensure that Category 3 catering waste is collected, transported and disposed of without endangering human health and without harming the environment. According to Article 6, Category 3 catering waste shall be transformed in a biogas plant or composted. It is prohibited to feed farmed animals other than fur animals with catering waste. Thus catering waste may be processed in accordance with national law until the Commission determines harmonised measures following the comitology procedure described in Art. 33(2) ABPR. As no harmonised process requirements have as yet been proposed by the Commission, the Member States can still regulate the treatment of catering waste in compost and biogas plants. According to Barth et al. (2008) 3, many Member States up to now misinterpreted the possibility to introduce more relaxed rules for composting of catering waste at least from source separated organic household waste and have taken over the full set of requirements of Annex VI of the ABPR in national licensing and plant approvals. 5. Revision of the IPPC Directive. The IPPC (Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control) Directive established a set of common rules for permitting and controlling industrial installations (Directive 3 Barth et al (2008), Compost production and use in the EU, report to the European Commission, Joint Research Centre/ITPS, Final report. (Annex 3 of Barth et al. contains an overview of how some Member States have implemented the ABPR) 24

25 2008/1/EC). The Impact Assessment for the proposed Directive on industrial emissions identified inconsistencies related to the biological treatment of organic waste and recommended to include this sector in the IPPC Directive. It pointed out that this type of waste treatment is covered under the current scope of the IPPC Directive only if it results in final compounds or mixtures which are discarded through disposal operations. The relevant BREFs contain BAT conclusions for these types of installations. This means that similar installations (with similar environmental impacts) resulting in waste or products (eg composting) which are not disposed of but recovered or used as products are not covered under the scope of the IPPC Directive. According to the Impact Assessment undertaken for this Directive, these inconsistencies result in possible distortion of competition between similar types of installations and a lower level of environmental protection for installations not covered under the IPPC Directive. The IA argues that the economic impacts of BAT implementation are limited. The smallest installations would not be covered by the IPPC Directive since their production capacity is below 50 tonnes per day. The IA recommends to cover this sector under the IPPC Directive. This advice has been followed in the proposal for the Directive. 6. Thematic Strategy on the Prevention and Recycling of Waste. The Thematic Strategy on the Prevention and Recycling of Waste refers to the report on national strategies, and points out that there is no single environmentally best option for the management of bio-waste that is diverted from landfill. It concludes that management for this type of waste should be determined by the Member States using life-cycle thinking. 7. Incineration Directive. The Directive sets emission limit values and monitoring requirements for pollutants to air such as dust, nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulphur dioxide (SO2), hydrogen chloride (HCl), hydrogen fluoride (HF), heavy metals and dioxins and furans. The Directive also sets controls on releases to water in order to reduce the pollution impact of waste incineration and coincineration on marine and fresh water ecosystems. Most types of waste incineration plants fall within the scope of the Directive, with some exceptions, such as those treating only biomass (e.g. vegetable waste from agriculture and forestry). 8. EU Policy for Renewable Energy and Directive on Renewable Energy Sources. The EU Policy for Renewable Energy and Directive on Renewable Energy Sources RES 2001/77 (amended by Directive 2004/8/EC on the promotion of cogeneration based on a useful heat demand in the internal energy market) establishes targets for total Renewable Energy Sources. As Biomass accounts for a relatively large share in total RES, this may lead to competing demands for biomass. The Proposal for a Directive on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources recognizes that the negative effects suggested by respondents during the Impact Assessment mostly relate to the pressure on biomass resources, which are also used for non-energy industrial use and its further exploitation may lead to shortages or undesirable environmental impacts. This is reflected in several clauses of the Proposal. 9. Soil Thematic Strategy and proposal for a Soil Framework Directive. Soil is a non-renewable resource which performs many vital functions: food and other biomass production, storage, filtration and transformation of many substances including water, carbon, nitrogen. Soil has a role as a habitat and gene pool, serves as a platform for human activities, landscape and heritage and acts as a provider of raw materials. These functions are worthy of protection because of their socioeconomic as well as environmental importance. Soil degradation is accelerating, with negative effects on human health, natural ecosystems and climate change, as well as on our economy. At the moment, only nine EU Member States have specific legislation on soil protection (especially on contamination). Different EU policies (for instance on water, waste, chemicals, industrial pollution prevention, nature protection, pesticides, agriculture) are contributing to soil protection. But as these policies have other aims and other scopes of action, they are not sufficient to ensure an adequate level of protection for all soil in Europe. For all these reasons, the Commission adopted a Soil Thematic Strategy (COM(2006) 231) and a proposal for a Soil Framework Directive (COM(2006) 232) on 22 September 2006 with the objective to protect soils across the EU. The Strategy and the proposal have been sent to the other European Institutions for the further steps in the decision-making process. 25

26 Legislation and policies that are related to bio-waste management but not further presented here are: - Packaging Directive; - European Climate Change Programme; - Soil protection when sewage sludge is used; - Nitrate Directive; - Common Agricultural Policy Waste prevention Reducing the amount of waste generated at source and reducing the hazardous content of that waste automatically simplifies its disposal. Waste prevention is closely linked with improving manufacturing methods and influencing consumers to demand greener products and less packaging. The Thematic Strategy on the prevention and recycling of waste (COM(2005) 666 final) addresses waste prevention as one of the priority issues. According to the Strategy, although waste prevention has been the paramount objective of both national and EU waste management policies for many years, limited progress has been made in transforming this objective into practical action. Neither the Community nor the national targets set in the past have been satisfactorily met. As a result, the Strategy concludes that prevention can only be achieved by influencing practical decisions taken at various stages of the life cycle: how a product is designed, manufactured, made available to the consumer and finally used. The revised Waste Framework Directive requires that Member States establish, by 12 December 2013, national waste prevention programmes. These programmes shall be evaluated at least every sixth year and revised as appropriate. They shall be integrated either into the waste management plans or into other environmental policy programmes, as appropriate, or shall function as separate programmes. If any such programme is integrated into the waste management plan or into other programmes, the waste prevention measures shall be clearly identified. The programmes shall set out the waste prevention objectives. Member States shall describe the existing prevention measures and evaluate the usefulness of the examples of measures indicated in Annex IV to the revised Waste Framework Directive or other appropriate measures. The aim of such objectives and measures shall be to break the link between economic growth and the environmental impacts associated with the generation of waste. According to the Article 29(3), Member States shall determine appropriate specific qualitative or quantitative benchmarks for waste prevention measures adopted, in order to monitor and assess their progress. To this end, they may develop targets and indicators. It follows from Article 29(4) those indicators for waste prevention measures may be adopted by the Commission in accordance with the procedure of Comitology. Article 29(5) also obliges the Commission to create a system for sharing information on best practice regarding waste prevention and develop guidelines in order to assist the Member States in the preparation of the programmes. Annex IV of the Directive gives examples of Waste Prevention Initiatives. 2.2 Current developments towards a bio-waste directive (status January 2011) At the moment, a procedure is on its way, to assess if a new bio-waste directive is justified. The Environment Directorate-General (DG ENV) of the European Commission is therefore currently carrying out an assessment of the existing and possible future management options of bio-waste. This assessment includes: - launching of a Green Paper On the management of bio-waste in the European Union (COM(2008) final of ), followed by a stakeholder consultation; - preparation of an impact assessment; - possible legislative or non-legislative follow-up; 26

27 The final version of the impact assessment report4 was published in February Based on this report both MEP (European Parliament) and the European Commission drew opposite conclusions: - MEP: The EC should draft specific EU legislation to introduce compulsory recycling of biowaste, including garden residue and food waste from restaurants and food processing units. The rules on the management of bio-waste are fragmented and the current legislative instruments are not sufficient to achieve the stated objectives of the effective management of bio-waste (6 July 2010). - EC: the Commission rejects calls for a stand-alone directive on bio-waste. Progress achieved in several member states shows that existing waste legislation is an excellent basis for advanced bio-waste management. For this, the available tools need to be used to their full potential and rigorously enforced where necessary in all member states. A number of EUlevel supporting initiatives, such as developing standards for compost, would be set up to accompany national action (18 May 2010). - on 18 May 2010, the Commission published a Communication on its analysis of the bio-waste management options and possible future steps in this area. The communication can be downloaded from According to the Commission's analysis there are no policy gaps at EU level that could prevent Member States from taking appropriate action. Progress achieved in several Member States shows that existing waste legislation is an excellent basis for advanced bio-waste management. For this, the available tools need to be used to their full potential and rigorously enforced where necessary in all Member States. Priority actions include rigorous enforcement of the targets on diverting bio-waste away from landfills, proper application of the waste hierarchy and other provisions of the Waste Framework Directive to introduce separate collection systems as a matter of priority. Supporting initiatives at EU level such as developing standards for compost will be crucial to accelerate progress and ensure a level playing field across the EU. This will involve specific guidance and indicators for biowaste prevention with possible future binding targets, as well as compost standards and guidelines on the application of life cycle thinking and assessment in the waste sector. - on 2 June 2010 the European Parliament's environment committee has backed a call by MEP José Manuel Fernandes for a directive on bio-waste with mandatory separate collection, despite the European Commission saying new legislation is not needed. However, the resolution's adoption is unlikely to have more than a symbolic impact because the Commission firmly believes a new law would not solve problems. - In August 2010, an advanced draft for consultation Manual Supporting Environmentally Sound Decisions for Bio-waste Management - A practical guide to Life Cycle Thinking (LCT) and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) in the context of bio-waste management was sent to member states. The guidance document provides anyone involved in bio-waste management with the key principles to improve the decision making process in the management of biowaste by using Life Cycle Thinking (LCT) and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). Focus is given to provide practical advice on bio-waste management to support Life Cycle Thinking including help decide if a full Life Cycle Assessment is needed, how to derive and/or use more straightforward life cycle based tools and criteria, or if evidence from previous assessments can help select the best management approach for bio-waste in your specific context. - September 2010, EC-ENV published a working document sludge and bio-waste The document is based on to changes of the bio-waste and sludge policy outlined in the Communication from the Commission on "Future steps in bio-waste management in the European Union" adopted on 18. May It aims to structure the further discussion with Member States and key stakeholders as well as to enable the Commission for a better preparation of the revision of the Directive on the use of sewage sludge in agriculture. - On December 3, 2011 the EC-ENV published a stakeholder consultation on the appropriateness of setting targets for bio-waste recycling, asking member states to provide 4 Draft final report of 12 February 2010 Assessment of the options to improve the management of bio-waste in the european union by Arcadis/Eunomia (Study contract nr /2008/517621/etu/g4) for the European Commission DG Environment; download from 27

28 information on the feasibility of implementing the 36.5% target, which it says corresponds to the average biological treatment rate in the EU. Under the Waste Framework directive, the commission has until 2014 to make up its mind on the bio-waste recycling target. The debate between MEP and EC will continue and it cannot be predicted how the legislation related to bio-waste management will develop. 2.3 Macedonian legislation related to bio-waste management The general policy for waste management set out in the First National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP) in 1996 in order to improve the situation and then to establish a sustainable system of waste management. The government has paved the way in waste management through policy initiatives of the NEAP, revised in 2007 (NEAP II), which is in line with EU requirements. The overall policy framework for waste management was established by the Law on Waste Management. This law has important links with other laws related to the tasks and responsibilities related to administrative, organizational and operational issues in waste management, especially the Law on Environment, which includes basic provisions on environmental permitting, impact assessment and environmental emissions of greenhouse gases. The Law on Waste Management introduced three major policy documents: - Strategy for Waste Management ( ), Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia no. 39/08, - National Plan for Waste Management ( ), Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia no. 77/09, - And local plans for waste management and numerous regulations that transpose all the above provisions of the EU. Authority for the preparation and adoption of all legal instruments and implementation of all directives is the Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning (MoEPP) as the national authority responsible for the environment. Competent authorities for inspection and other enforcement tasks are generally: the State Inspectorate of Environment and local inspection authority (approved inspectors). Internal allocation of tasks and responsibilities exist under the MoEPP and is based on the current structure of the MoEPP, the waste management department is within the Environmental Administration and has a wide range of responsibilities and activities: planning, adoption and implementation of legislation, standards and rules for management of different types of waste, monitoring, issuing of permits for collectors, transporters, exporters and operators of waste management facilities, as well as initiation and coordination of waste management. The development of primary and secondary legislation is carried out in cooperation with other ministries and bodies and they are: 1. LAW ON ENVIRONMENT ( Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia no. 53/05, 84/05, 24/07, 159/08, 83/09, 48/10, 124/10 and 51/11) and regulations pertaining to IPPC: 1.1 Regulation on substances that must be prescribed emission limit values in the A integrated environmental permits, Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia no. 72/ Decree on the amount of compensation that should be paid by operators of installations carrying out activities for the A integrated environmental permit, Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia no. 64/ Regulation Amending the Regulation on the fee that has to pay the operators of installations carrying out activities for the B integrated environmental permit, Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia no. 64/10 28

29 1.4 Regulation on the fee that you pay to operators of installations carrying out activities for the B integrated environmental permit, Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia no. 117/ Regulation for the fee paid by operators of installations carrying out activities which are issued permits with adjustment plan, Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia no. 117/ Rulebook on the procedure for issuing an adjustment permit with adjustment plan, Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia no. 4/ Rulebook on the procedure for obtaining B integrated environmental permit, Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia no. 4/ Rules of procedure for obtaining the A integrated environmental permit, Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia no. 4/ Decree for the activities of the installations for which an environmental permit or permit with adjustment plan and timetable for submission of application for adjustment permit with adjustment plan, Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia no. 89/ LAW ON WASTE MANAGEMENT, purified text "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 09/ GENERAL RULES FOR HANDLING WASTE Regulations on limit values of emissions in the incineration of waste and the conditions and manner of operation of incineration and combustion "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 123/09" Rules on the amount of biodegradable compounds in waste must be disposed of, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 108/ Correction of the Rules of the amount of biodegradable compounds in waste must be disposed of, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 108/ Rules for the expenses when the inspection is performed at the request of the person or entity and the manner of their payment, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 101/ Rulebook on general rules for dealing with municipal and other non-hazardous waste, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 147/ BASEL CONVENTION - on the Control of Trans-boundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal Correction of the Regulation on the format and content of the trans-boundary movement of waste, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 38/ Conditions on the form and content of the trans-boundary movement of hazardous waste, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 37/03" 2.3 WASTES List of Wastes, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 100/ WASTE MANAGERS Rules for the program and the manner of passing the exam for waste manager, form of the certificate for the waste manager, and the amount and manner of the fee for taking the exam, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 137/ Rules Amending the Rules for the program and how to take an exam for waste manager, form of certificate, and the amount and payment of the fee for taking the exam for waste manager, "Official Gazette of the Republic Macedonia" no. 39/ Rules Amending the Rules for the program and how to take an exam for waste managers, the form and certificate and the amount and manner of payment of the fee for taking the exam, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia no. 133/ Correction of the Rules for the program and the manner of passing the professional exam for waste manager, certified form, and the amount and payment of the fee for taking the exam for the waste manager, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 109/ Rules for the program and the manner of passing the professional exam for waste manager, certified form, and the amount and payment of the fee for taking the exam for waste manager, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 105/ RECORDS OF WASTE Conditions for the content and manner of keeping, storing and maintaining records in the register of waste, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 39/ Conditions on the form and content of the log for handling the waste form and content of the forms of identification and transportation of waste and the form and content of annual reports for handling waste, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 7/06 29

30 2.5.3 Rules on the form and content of the log for handling the waste form and content of the forms of identification and transportation of the waste form and the forms of the content of the annual report on the treatment of waste, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 7/ INTEGRATED NETWORK OF WASTE REMOVAL Regulation on conditions for operation of an integrated network of waste removal, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 7/ PERMITS FOR WASTE MANAGEMENT Conditions on the form and content of the collection and transportation of hazardous waste, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 118/ Conditions on the form and content of the application for a permit and the form and content of the performing operator of the incineration or combustion of waste "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" br.108/ Decision of the Constitutional Court of Republic of Macedonia, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 162/ Regulation Amending the Regulation on the format and content of the application for permit processing, treatment and / or storage of waste form and content of the license and the minimum technical requirements for performing processing, treatment and / storage or waste, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 122/ Conditions on the form and content of the application for a permit and the form and content of the landfill operator, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 140/ Regulations Amending the rulebook on the form and content of the application form and content of the collection and transportation of municipal and other types of hazardous waste, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 133/ Conditions on the form and content of license request and register of issued licenses to trade with non-hazardous waste, the manner and procedure for issuing the permit, the manner of keeping records and the conditions of the method for performing non-hazardous waste trade, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 115/ Rules amending the Rules on the form and content of the application for permit processing, treatment and / or storage of waste form and content of the license and the minimum technical requirements for performing processing, treatment and / or waste storage, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 76/ Conditions on the form and content of the application for permit processing, treatment and / or storage of waste form and content of the license and the minimum technical requirements for performing processing, treatment and / or storing waste, "Official Gazette Republic of Macedonia" no. 23/07 Appendix 1 - Application for permit for storage and / or waste processing Appendix 2 - Statement of the reliability of data and documentation submitted by the responsible persons in enterprises Rules for the form and content of the form and content of the collection and transportation of municipal and other types of hazardous waste and minimal technical conditions for performing collection and transportation of municipal and other types of hazardous waste, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 8/ Rules on the form and content of the application form and content of the collection and transportation of municipal and other types of no hazard waste and minimum technical requirements for performing collection and transportation of municipal and other types of hazardous waste, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 8/ TRANSFER STATIONS Rules on minimum technical requirements in terms of environmental protection that need to meet transfer stations, the conditions should be met in locations that are being built or set transfer stations as well as deadlines for storage of waste at the transfer stations according to the types of waste, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 39/ SPECIAL HANDLING WASTE TYPES Correction of the Rules for the handling of waste from titanium dioxide, the method of monitoring performance and form, content and manner of delivering information, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no.108/ Conditions for measures to protect the environment that must take the manufacturers, owners and entities handling used vehicles, their components and materials, goals and deadlines for their achievement and conditions for storage, format and content of the certificate to take the 30

31 vehicle for destruction, the form and content of the notification form and manner of keeping, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 108/ Rules on the handling of waste tires, as well as requirements to meet legal and natural persons that import used tires, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 108/ Regulation on the handling of waste from titanium dioxide, the manner of conducting monitoring and form, content and method of delivering data, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 108/ Regulation Amending the Regulation on conditions for dealing with PCBs, the method and conditions to meet the installations and facilities for disposal and decontamination of PCBs, used PCBs and method of labeling of equipment containing PCBs, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 130/ Regulation on detailed conditions for handling hazardous waste and the manner of packaging and labeling of hazardous waste, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 15/ Rules for the procedures and manner of collection, transportation, processing, storage, treatment and disposal of waste oils, the method of record keeping and submission of data, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 156/ Rules on the handling of medical waste, as well as the packaging and labeling of medical waste, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 146/ Regulation on conditions for dealing with PCBs, the method and conditions to meet the installations and facilities for disposal and decontamination of PCBs, used PCBs and method of labeling of equipment containing PCBs, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 48/07 Form A - Company information, location and equipment containing / contaminated with PCBs Form B - Information on equipment likely to contain PCB Tues form - Information on waste which may contain PCB Register of equipment containing / contaminated with PCBs, fir and is designed to remove Rules for the handling of asbestos waste and waste products containing asbestos, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 89/ STORAGE OF WASTE Regulation on conditions for waste storage, as well as requirements to meet the locations to which they store waste, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 72/ LANDFILLS Conditions of conditions in terms of technical means and equipment for performing removal of waste and the conditions and manner of training and staff training program, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 108/ Conditions of requirements to meet the landfill, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 78/ Rulebook on the criteria for acceptance of waste in landfills each class, the preparatory procedures for the acceptance of waste, common testing procedures, sampling and acceptance of waste, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 8/ Manner and procedure for operation, monitoring, operation and control of landfill operations, and monitoring and control of landfill closure phase and ongoing concern for landfill closure, as well as conditions for care of the after will stop working, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 156/ Conditions of form and content of the request for establishment of non-hazardous and inert waste, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 133/07 3. LAW ON MANAGEMENT OF PACKAGING AND PACKAGING WASTE, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 161/ Rules on form and content of the annual report on the type and amount of packaging is imported or released to the market in Macedonia in the previous calendar year and for dealing with waste packaging they form and content of the production specification, form and content of the records for the total package which is put on the market or imported into Macedonia and the way records are kept, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 117/ Conditions of the way of running form and content closer to the database and information system for packaging and packaging waste, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 113/10 31

32 3.3 Rulebook on numbering and abbreviations on which the system for identification and labeling of materials from which packaging is produced, and the form and content of the label for handling packaging, "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 62/ List of illustrative examples of packaging "Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia" no. 52/10 32

33 3 Assessment on the amount of bio-waste in Macedonia 3.1 Background The aim of this assessment is to develop a basis for preparation of a national action plan for management of bio-waste in Macedonia in order to fulfil EU-regulation. This analysis is considered as an essential instrument to obtain current waste generation rates and future trends and compositional data. The assessment shall enable waste management measures to be planned, monitored and optimized. The methodological approach included data collection process which have involved desk study, as well as activities for field survey, and consequently resulted in preparation of comprehensive assessment on the bio waste generation situation from various sectors, including households, restaurants, shops, food industry (dairy, bakery, etc.) In the framework of the execution of this assessment, following main activates were done: Identification and evaluation of existing documentation, reports, statistical and other available databases and relevant sartorial policy documents (plans, programs and strategies) potentially containing information of use for the survey. Consultation of various stakeholders and affected parties (individuals, groups and institutions). Classification of the bio waste streams on basis of the EU List of waste. 3.2 General Municipal Waste Management Situation in Macedonia Table 3-1. Municipal waste management and collection Indicator / parameter Value(2004) * Total municipal waste (t/year) 572,381 Composition of the municipal solid waste (MSW) Table below Figure below Municipal waste generated per capita (kg/inhabitant/year): 313 Coverage of MSW collection system 70% (% of population covered) 100% Urban areas: 10% Rural areas: Type of treatment (%) Landfilled: 97.0 Recycled: 3.0 Incinerated: 0.0 Composted: 0.0 Quantity of waste illegally dumped (t/year) n/a Quantity of waste imported/exported (t/year) n/a * Source: National Waste Management Plan

34 Table 3-2. Total municipal waste generation and composition year 2004 Waste stream Quantities (t/year) (%) Household waste 417, Commercial waste 154, Type of wastes Biodegradable waste 148, Packaging waste 97, Bulky waste 28,619 5 Other wastes 297, Total MSW 572, Source: National Waste Management Plan Fines 30.9% Metals 2.6% HZW household 0.2% Composites 2.2% Complex products 0.3% Other 3.6% Organic 26.2% Inert 3.6% Textiles 2.9% Glass 3.5% Plastics 9.6% Paper and Cardboard 11.6% Wood 2.7% Figure 3-1. Composition of the total municipal (household and commercial) waste Source: National Waste Management Plan Waste Analysis in Macedonia Waste analyses are indispensable instruments to obtain waste generation rates and compositional data and to enable waste management measures to be planned, monitored and optimized. Currently, Macedonia has no systematic approach or standardised methodology for the analysis of solid waste. Initial attempt to conduct waste analysis according to solid waste analysis methodology suitable for the situation in Macedonia and in accordance with international best practices has been done in 2004 / 2005 in framework of the preparation of the first national waste management plan Main findings and results of the assessment Waste generation rates The results from the waste analyses performed in 2004 / 2005 indicate that the household mixed waste generation rate is 0.62 kg/cap/day or 224 kg/cap/year. The analyses established that 73% of the collected waste is household waste. Taking into account that 73% of the waste is household waste, the total waste generation is estimated at 0.86 kg/cap/day or 313 kg/cap/year. 34

35 Waste composition The analysis of the waste composition shows that the dominant waste fractions are organics and fines, with participation of 26.2% and 30.9% respectively, or in total, more than 50% of the generated waste. Paper and cardboard participate with 11.6%, followed by plastics with 9.6%. All other waste fractions, i.e. wood, glass, textiles, metals, hazardous household waste and other categories participate in total less than 25% of the generated waste. Table 3-3. Composition of household waste, commercial waste and total waste in Macedonia Single Average,% in area of investigation dwellings* Multi storey buildings* Household waste# Commercial waste* total waste ## Organic Wood Paper and Cardboard Plastics Glass Textiles Metals Hazardous Household Waste Composites Complex Products Inert Other Categories Fines TOTAL * results of each investigated group are included proportional to the produced weight # results of each investigated type of house are included proportional to produced weight ## weighed average using following waste generation rate.household waste 0.62 kg/day.commercial waste 0.24 kg/day Source: Special Study on Waste Analysis - National Waste Management Plan and Feasibility Studies, 2005 Sorting analysis showed that 17.65% of the generated mixed waste is packaging material, resulting in approximately 51 kg packaging per person per year. This is very low compared to the European- 15 average of 158 kg/person in 1997, however in agreement with data reported for some CEE countries. Waste density During the analysis the density of the waste in the containers was roughly estimated. The results vary between 58 kg/m 3 and 286 kg/m 3. One of the reasons for the high specific weight is the higher construction and demolition content in those analyses, although it is not believed this is the only explanation. For single houses the average waste density is 127 kg/m 3, for multi storey buildings 113 kg/m 3 and for commercial waste 97 kg/m 3. Table 3-4. Specific waste per area of investigation Waste density single houses high rise buildings commercial waste kg/m 3 kg/m 3 kg/m 3 Winter Summer Average Source: Special Study on Waste Analysis - National Waste Management Plan and Feasibility Studies, 2005 Detailed overview of the waste analysis is given in Annex 5. 35

36 3.3.2 Biowaste Quantities Table 3-5. Biowaste waste quantities resume National level indicators Municipal waste generation per capita (kg/y) kg/y Biowaste (%) appox. 26% Bio-waste per capita (kg/y) Regional level Planning region Population per region *) Biowaste quantity per region (tons/year) % of total biowaste 81.4 kg/y North - east 173,982 14, East 180,938 14, South - east 171,972 13, Vardar region 154,230 12, Pelagonija region 236,088 19, South - west 222,385 18, Polog region 310,178 25, Skopje region 590,455 48, Total 2,040, , *) Source: Ministry of Local Self Government ( 3.4 Questionnaire Waste Data A questionnaire was developed for the purpose of this biowaste assessment. It was disseminated to all 84 local self governments municipalities in the country. A response was delivered by 30 municipalities or 36 % of their total number. Summary of the data received is given in Annex 5. 36

37 4 Strategies for municipal waste collection and treatment The Landfill Directive (LD) is the main driver for diversion of the biodegradable part of municipal waste from landfills. The LD requires Member States to progressively reduce landfilling of municipal biodegradable waste to 35% of the total municipal waste produced by 2016 (compared to 1995). Member States that heavily relied on landfilling in 1995 have a four year extension period (i.e. till 2020). The objective of these measures is to reduce the production and release of greenhouse gases from landfills. However, the LD does not prescribe specific treatment options for the diverted waste. In practice, Member States are often inclined to choose the seemingly easiest and cheapest option, disregarding actual environmental benefits and costs including burdens which may be created elsewhere. The second driver for diverting biodegradable waste from landfills is the revised Waste Framework Directive (WFD), especially article 4 on the waste hierarchy. The WFD encourages Member States to collect separately and recycle bio-waste and allows including it when calculating the binding recycling target for municipal waste. Furthermore, the WFD enables the setting of EU minimum requirements for bio-waste management and criteria for the quality of compost from bio-waste, including requirements on the origin of the waste and treatment processes. Such criteria have been called for to enhance user confidence and strengthen the market in support of a material efficient economy. The Commission Communication on future steps in bio-waste management in the European Union provides the steps that are considered necessary for improving the overall environmental performance of current bio-waste management systems. In particular, it is stressed that bio-waste management should follow the waste hierarchy. As such prevention of bio-waste should be the key goal, followed by separate collection and biological treatment, e.g. composting and anaerobic digestion. As a result of the implementation of the Landfill Directive disposal of biodegradable waste, including bio-waste has to be reduced drastically in the coming years. As shown in Figure 4-1, the options for treatment of municipal waste that are proven on large scale and in many countries are: - Biological treatment: composting, digestion; - Mechanical-biological treatment; - Incineration. 37

38 Recyclable Materials: Plastics Glass Paper Metals Municipal solid waste Energy Separate collection Mixed collection Energy Biological treatment Biodegradable materials Recyclable Materials* Reprocessing (export or local) Recyclable Materials* Recyclable Materials* MBT RDF Incineration Residues Residues High quality compost Compost Low quality stabilised organic matter Landfill Figure 4-1. Strategies for municipal waste management As these guidelines are only dealing with bio-waste, only the left part of the figure (separate collection and biological treatment) will be dealt with in this book. A complete scheme of the main treatment routes are given in Table 4-1. Pyrolysis and gasification are much less applied than the other techniques. Table 4-1. Main treatment methods Treatment method Further characterisation For source separated waste collection (=bio-waste) Composting Open and closed types, centralised or home composting Anaerobic digestion With and without digestate composting, efficiency of the energy recovery Pyrolysis and Mainly applied on dry streams, with the view of burning for energy gasification recovery For mixed waste collection Mechanical biological treatment Incineration Landfill = pre-treatment to separate biodegradable waste followed by treatment similar to "source separated waste". Separation is based on mechanical properties. Possible treatments are: composting (stabilization), anaerobic digestion and/or energy recovery and/or used as filling/covering material With and without energy recovery, efficiency of the energy recovery With or without methane recovery, legal and illegal dumping (Efficiency of energy recovery should be mentioned as it is regarding other processes i.e. anaerobic digestion. Bio-waste management often results in recycling products and energy recovery. These biodegradable waste-based products avoid the use of other products and generally result in positive environmental benefit. Table lists the considered products from recycling of materials and energy recovery and the related avoided products. The different types of residues are also listed. 38

39 Table 4-2. Recovered products, avoided products and remaining waste streams Treatment method Recovered products Avoided products For source separated waste collection (=bio-waste) Composting Compost Growing media, fertilizer, conditioner Anaerobic Biogas Electricity, heat, growing digestion Compost media, fertilizer, conditioner Remaining waste Residues, impurities Residues, impurities For mixed waste collection Mechanical biological Energy Electricity, heat, soil covering Stabilised waste Residues, impurities treatment Incineration Biogas Electricity, heat, bottom ash Residues used as secondary construction material, recovered metals. Landfill With or without methane Residues recovery, legal and illegal dumping As illustrated in Table 4-2, the range of products recovered from the treatment of bio-waste is relatively wide: - Quality compost can be used either as: soil fertiliser (bringing nitrogen, phosphorus or potassium to the soil), soil conditioner (transferring specific physical properties to the soil), growing media (soil substrate) in agricultural fields, green areas, forestry, horticulture (nurseries, greenhouses, etc.), for home/hobby gardening, etc. - Low quality compost can be used as soil coverings, (e.g. landfills), for green areas along motorways and railways as well as in public gardens, etc. In this case, the environmental benefit is lower. - Biogas that can be used: for heating, in combined heat and power (CHP) units, as a fuel for vehicles, as upgraded biogas injected into the gas grid The fraction of the treated bio-waste that will be turned into actual recycling products and energy recovery depends on the quality and composition of the initial bio-waste. This is especially the case for recycling products, such as compost coming from MBT facilities. Indeed, the quality of recovered products from these types of facilities is often not optimal because: - They manage mixed bio-waste, - They were primarily constructed to separate the organic fraction of household waste before landfilling, - The processes are often undersized and operation is not optimised towards material recovery. MBT of mixed waste streams is becoming increasingly popular as a method for treating mixed waste. Whilst MBT can separate many recyclables from mixed waste, the resultant organic residue can contain high levels of heavy metals and physical and biological contaminants. Various studies have shown that end-products from MBT have 5 to 10 times more heavy metals content compared to compost resulting from source separated bio-waste. Compost from MBT has low quality and some Member States even consider it as waste that should therefore not be used as soil improver. Therefore, it seems that these treatment methods should remain regulated according to legislation relating to landfilling, and that the application of stabilised biodegradable wastes should be restricted to limited applications (non-agricultural use). From a legal viewpoint in many countries, composts derived from MSW remain wastes rather than compost. This legal barrier prevents the wholesale application of MBT compost to agriculture and horticulture. 39

40 Although MBT-derived composts are of low quality, they could possibly represent a resource particularly for use in post-industrial environments. MBT composts have the potential to play a beneficial role in the remediation and regeneration of a variety of contaminated and post-industrial sites. There is the need of proper investigation into the contaminants levels of compost from MBT and associated full risk assessment for use on target land area (e.g. contaminated and postindustrial sites). 40

41 5 Infrastructure for separate collection systems of biowaste Strategies for municipal waste collection and treatment 5.1 Questionnaire Waste Data Based on the differences in local conditions, three different situations (dwelling structures) can be distinguished: 1. Rural: areas with a very low population density where housing consists of single houses with large areas 2. Suburbs and villages: area with average population density where housing mainly consists of houses with gardens 3. Inner city: areas with high population density and housing are predominantly apartments and high-rise buildings without gardens A further characterization of the mentioned dwelling structures can be made as following: - Rural Areas. Experience has shown that the amount of about 30 kg/cap/year of organics discovered in the remaining waste from rural area. This very low amount is due to highly efficient traditional home composting in rural areas. The main task in rural areas is therefore not a reduction of organics, since maintaining the actual status would already be a success. However, experience shows that organics increase even in rural areas with developing welfare. A motivational campaign in rural areas should help to maintain backyard composting and animal feeding. - Suburbs and villages. People living in suburbs and villages often live in single family houses. They are often taking care of their own garden and have a higher awareness of nature, soil, plants, compost and nutrients, therefore making them more accessible for the idea of bio-waste collection and the production of compost. A relevant share of the garden waste is selfcomposted, but due to a number of reasons backyard composting in suburbs does not reach the efficiency of rural areas. At least half of the primarily produced organics are found in the household waste, meaning kg/cap/year. Bio-waste collection can reduce this amount to kg/cap/year. By experience it must be considered, that bio-waste collection reduces backyard composting activities. - Inner cities. The higher the number of families living in houses and using centralized bins for separation, the lower is the quality of the separated recyclables and bio-waste. Another option for bio-waste collection in the inner part of the city is from areas with high concentration of restaurants, canteens, food shops, etc. This can be organized by providing the restaurants and food shops with bio-waste containers for separate collection of food waste. Experiences in biowaste collection in inner cities show that the recovery rate of organics in bio waste is roughly 30%, meaning 20 kg/cap/year. This is the result of 30% of the inhabitants participating in the separate collection, while 70% do not participate. Bio-waste from households are the result of the socio-economic level of the population. Lower life standards in the villages and most of the towns reduce the bio-waste quantity to minimum. In the rural regions the bio-wastes from foodstuffs are used, and most probably will be used for many years, for feeding the livestock, while the shavings from the fruit-trees and some of the packages are burned. The residual bio-waste of the city households varies according to the size of the towns. 5.2 Types of bio-waste streams The aim is to focus on the possible approaches in managing bio-waste produced at municipal level. By bio-waste we mean all relevant materials defined in the EU waste catalogue regarding Municipal Waste as stated in Commission decision 2000/532/EC and amended in 2001/118/EC. Bio-wastes are those materials described in Table

42 Table 5-1. Materials falling under the definition of bio-waste Description Waste EUcode Notes Kitchen and canteen from households, restaurants, canteens, waste (food waste) bars, coffee-shops, hospital and school canteens, etc. Waste from public only biodegradable materials equivalent to markets codes n and n Garden and park waste from private gardens and public parks and (yard waste) areas, etc. Wood waste not containing dangerous substances no furniture and bulky household-waste However, besides the above materials, specific organic residues from the processing of agricultural products (agro-industries) may serve as a very valuable source of feedstock for either composting or anaerobic digestion. This report will focus on two main categories of bio-waste which are most suitable for high-quality compost production: - Food waste: the mixture of both cooked and raw materials left over after the preparation and consumption of human food; the origin can be either private (households), or from restaurants, canteens, bars, etc.; - Garden waste: the mixture of waste coming from private gardens (i.e families) or from public areas such as parks, playgrounds, etc. 5.3 Data on the generation of bio-waste in EU countries Since the mid-nineties the separate collection and utilization of bio-waste is part of waste management practices in almost all Dutch, German, Swiss municipalities. In terms of amounts and quality of bio-waste collection, there are differences when looking at the three main types of dwelling structures. On average one person roughly produces 70 kg/year of organic kitchen wastes. In areas with attached garden, an amount of 1 kg/m 2 /year of garden waste must be added. Research 5 has shown interesting relationships between the organic waste potential and prosperity levels in cities. 5 Beigl P., Wassermann G., Schneider F., Salhofer S. (2003). The Use of Life Cycle Assessment Tool for the Development of Integrated Waste Management Strategies for Cities and Regions with Rapid Growing Economies, Institute for Waste Management, BOKU University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences (ABF BOKU), Vienna, Austria. 42

43 Figure 5-1. Prosperity and organics waste potential in cities (kg/cap/yr) Considering the mass percentages of MSW generation versus growing welfare, there is a obvious significant decrease from 45 mass% (low) to the two wealthiest city groups (33 respectively 34 mass%). It is interesting to note that the organic waste potential in the low-prosperity group is the lowest in absolute terms (kg/cap/yr), but the highest in relative terms (mass%) of all groups. For the Netherlands the following data are available for the amounts of bio-waste that are collected at households: Population density Rural Suburbs Inner city Amount of biodegradable waste (kg/cap/year) The higher numbers for less densely populated areas are due to the presence of more garden waste (more gardens) in these areas. For the Macedonian situation the following amounts of biodegradable waste per dwelling structure are reported 6 : Rural Suburbs Inner city Population < > Amount of biodegradable waste (kg/cap/year) These numbers include the bio-waste from both municipal and commercial activities. 5.4 Approaches for bio-waste collection Regarding the differentiation in dwelling structures and bio-waste streams, we can summarize approaches for the three situations. 6 Based on the Research done by SGS Institut Fresenius GmbH in March

44 5.4.1 Inner cities Larger municipalities willing to realize optimized collection schemes for food waste and at the same time preventing excessive deliveries (and cost) for garden waste management. Home composting is in any case the basic instrument for managing garden waste; it might be also collected at the doorstep, but only by charging for that service. This can effectively be managed by selling paper bags by the municipalities to the households, in which the garden waste must be provided at the curb side on demand. Table 5-2. Bio-waste collection approach in inner cities Food waste Separate collection Home composting Municipal collection centre Yes (door tot door) Garden waste On demand only yes Yes Suburbs and villages The second situation applies for small municipalities, with a large presence of semi-detached houses or suburbs with a rural structure; in this case home-composting should be used as a tool for both food and garden waste management in those areas with detached and semidetached settlings. Families living in apartments and flats (high-rise buildings) should be served by a specific collection for food waste. Garden waste is separately collected predominantly at municipal collection centres. It might be also be collected at the doorstep on demand, but only by charging for that service. Table 5-3. Bio-waste collection approach in suburbs Separate collection Home composting Municipal collection centre Food waste Yes (only high-rise yes buildings) Garden waste no yes Yes Rural areas The third situation is applicable to rural areas, with small villages (inhabit < ); in these cases, home-composting can constitute the only tool for food and garden waste management; a limited number of households, either not willing to do home-composting or living in flats, can be provided with a separate collection scheme. In these situations cooperation with local farmers and decentralized composting should be considered first. Table 5-4. Bio-waste collection approach in rural areas Separate collection Home composting Municipal collection centre Food waste No yes Garden waste No yes for large amounts only 44

45 5.5 Schemes for separate collection of bio-waste Introduction Separate collection of bio-waste represents a strategic choice in order to reach high recycling targets and to reduce the amount of bio-waste to be disposed. Where garden waste is collected together with kitchen waste, it is not unusual to see collection rates at least in settlements with single houses and gardens as high as kg/cap/year and more. We have to underline that such a situation makes recycling rates higher, but it also increases the overall quantity of waste to be collected and treated. Sometimes collection at the doorstep for garden waste reaches kg/cap/year garden waste collected, but at the same time, it leads to a worryingly high figure of around 800 kg/cap/year for total waste risings. We believe that rather than collecting bio-wastes which can be treated at home through home composting, effort has to be made to find suitable systems that enable high recycling rates, without causing an increase in the overall MSW collected. Best practice cases in EU-countries are effective in this regard if the collection scheme for bio-waste keeps the collection of food waste and that of garden waste separated. One scheme has to tackle only food waste as a whole (including cooked foods such as meat and fish), by means of small volume bins and buckets, whereas a different scheme tackles garden waste only. A specific collection of garden waste enables waste managers to plan and run a system: - which does not involve seasonal fluctuations for the collection of food waste; - which is kept separated from the specific collection systems for food waste. Food wastes are fermentable, wet and have much higher bulk density, thus requiring tools and systems specifically suited to them; - with relatively low collection and treatment costs for the garden waste itself, thanks to simplified collection and lower processing fees applied by composting plants; and - which makes it possible to enhance home composting. As long as households are not provided with a large-volume bin, they are less likely to deliver their yard waste to the collection service, so they are more likely to try, or to continue, backyard composting Collection of municipal green yard waste Municipal green yard waste are organic residues coming from public parks, cemeteries, street trees (leaves, twigs) as well as from private enterprises taking care of the garden/park areas of their clients. The operational advantage of this organic waste fraction is that it is already collected separately by own vehicles. Therefore, composting could be implemented as an effective first measure in the cities. Composting is quite simple, since green yard waste does not create any emissions as compared to bio-waste. This can be accompanied by general restrictions to deliver green yard waste to the local landfill. Of course the option must be provided to discharge green yard waste in a separate area close to the landfill s entrance. Depending on the in the locale structures, the system can be extended by providing semi centralized for garden waste from private households or people can bring their own waste to the composting site Collection schemes for garden waste Garden waste collections tend to be additional collections. In terms of their effectiveness in diverting bio-waste from landfill, the effect is limited entirely to the effect on garden waste which might otherwise have found itself into refuse. Other things being equal, this effect would be expected to be greatest in situations where there was (prior to the garden waste collection being implemented) less constraint on the delivery of garden waste into refuse. But even in such situations, an increase in collected quantities is to be expected. 45

46 The delivery of garden waste is stimulated by the convenience of its collection. This may have the following consequences which, though generally negative, can be addressed: - A high delivery of garden waste into the collection system; - A high level of seasonality in the collected waste; - A disincentive to home-composting (if the collection is free); and - An increase in costs resulting from the high delivery of material; - The general outcome is a high recycling rate, but the overall MSW arising figures are much higher as well (an additional weight of more than 100kg per inhabitant may be expected). Hence an increase in costs resulting from the high delivery of material is to be expected. In an attempt to address previous mentioned undesirable effects of intensive door-to-door collections and uncontrolled bring schemes by means of road containers, to realize an effective scheme for garden-waste management priority should be given to: 1. Promotion and enhancement of home-composting: as long as households are not provided with free garden waste collections, they can be encouraged to try backyard composting, or to maintain such behaviour in those many places where such composting is already widely practiced. This maintains a good balance between the delivery of yard waste to the service and the participation to programs for home composting; 2. Bring schemes, collecting garden-waste at municipal collection centers (MCC), representing a relatively low-cost collection system for municipalities, even if the recycling (composting) will represent an additional cost. The average capture of garden waste collected where systems are well established through specific collection routes, mainly adopting bring schemes at MCC, is often kg inh-1 year-1; 3. Collection at the door-step; in order to help people who find it troublesome to go to MCC (for instance due to lack of space in their car, or whatever the problem) a collection at the doorstep can be run, with a specific round ( green circuit ). It is advisable to do this only in specific seasons and with a much lower frequency of collection than that of kitchen waste. (i.e. monthly or less). A general rule for municipalities should be that where there are lawn cuttings, there is a garden in which home composting could be performed. The purpose should then be to adopt a collection system which does not make it too easy for households to deliver their garden waste. This is why it makes sense to keep the collection of garden waste separate from the collection of kitchen waste Collection schemes for food waste Running source separation for food waste, both at households and for large producers, implies the need for tools to face problems linked to the specific features of such a material. These include its fermentable nature and its high moisture content. In this respect, a service which is comfortable, and where households are provided with tools to avoid nuisance, will result in enhanced participation and will thus result in a higher collection quantity/quality. These issues have to be best tackled through: - a relatively intensive collection schedule (intensifying frequencies depending on seasons and/or type of dwellings); - the use, in most cases, of collection systems at the doorstep so as to have them more user-friendly and enhance the participation rate. - the use of watertight, transparent receptacles to confine the waste ( Biobags ). These features will be described in the following sections. Intensive collection schemes for food waste imply that each waste producer (family, shops, private enterprise) must be equipped with specific tools (bags, buckets, wheel-bins) that can be used to easily manage putrescible materials (including cooked substances such as meat, fish, soups, food scraps, etc). A range of specific tools will be suggested and considered as personal equipment to be given to waste producers. 46

47 5.6 Tools for separate collection Tools for Households The most important piece of advice is to make the source separation of food waste convenient and manageable in a clean way within the kitchen. This can be achieved by equipping each family with: - A small-bin of 6-10 l to be put inside the kitchen; - A set of transparent bags to be used as a liner inside the small-bin. The small bin-size prevents the delivery of bulky materials (e.g. bottles, cans), allowing higher biowaste purity. The use of the bags is intended to: - make it possible to collect even meat and fish scraps along with vegetables and fruit residues, avoiding nuisance generally related to delivery of loose material inside the bin; and - prevent pest attraction (insects) and production of leachate, whilst keeping the bins as clean as possible (from food waste). The combined use of bins and bags is intended, therefore, to enhance overall captures of food waste which, in turn, allows a significant reduction of putrescible materials inside residual waste, and hence a reduction in collection frequency for residual waste.10 Once full, bags have to be placed inside buckets and wheeled bins given to each household, with their volume corresponding to the effective production of food waste. The collection tools will be: - buckets (20 to 30 litres) - in areas with detached houses and gardens so as to reduce the pick-up time for each dwelling (loading is manual) and prevent households from delivering garden waste inside the bins; and - wheeled-bins whose capacity usually ranges from 80 to 240 liters where the type of dwelling is flats in high-rise buildings. One wheel-bin is for 10 to 20 families depending on the collection frequency. Buckets and wheeled bins will be put on the curb on the day of collection and hence are part of the collection scheme itself. Table 5-5. Bins, bags and buckets appropriate for separate collection of food waste Tools for Commercial Enterprises Commercial enterprises producing large amounts of food waste include: - restaurants, take away and coffee-shops, canteens - canteens at schools, university and hospitals; and - supermarkets, fruit and vegetable shops, public marketplaces 47

48 In the case of bars, and take-away stands producing small amounts of food waste (amounts comparable to those of a family), the same collection tools given to households should be used. For larger producers the collection tools volume must be enlarged. The collection tools will be: - one or more wheeled-bins whose capacity usually ranges from 120 to 240 litres; - in the case of supermarkets, open-markets and flower shops the container size can reach up to 600 litres. A liner can be placed inside the wheel-bins, in order to keep them clean and reduce the demand for washing. Generally the latter activity is to be done by the producers. Table 5-6. Collection tools for food-waste (door to door collection schemes) Collection Frequencies The average collection frequency of mixed waste (residual waste) ranges from 2 times/month to 1time/week, and higher emptying frequencies are applied only for road-containers, positioned in high-rise building areas, in order to assure sufficient collection volumes. Therefore the national prescription for a minimum emptying frequency of 1 collection every 2 weeks for waste should be applied to the putrescible fraction of waste, intending to assure public health and hygiene. Food waste collection from households has to be performed relatively intensively, providing: - A minimum of 2 collections per month - An increase up to 4 times/month or more in warmer seasons (typically June, July, August) - For specific commercial enterprises, producing large quantities of food waste, a specific collection round with a higher frequency (1/week) may be planned and run in resort places where density of restaurants and canteens justifies such scheme Integrating Residual Waste and Food waste Collection One finds a very important interaction between: - increases of captures of recyclables; - smaller quantities of residual waste to be collected and disposed of; - smaller volumes of bags/containers required for its collection Needless to say, a growth in the capture of dry recyclables namely the most bulky ones, e.g. paper, card and plastics allows a smaller volume of containers/bags for residual waste. This in turn further promotes the diversion of dry recyclables into proper streams. Furthermore, the implementation of intensive, high-diversion schemes for food waste reduces significantly the presence of putrescibles inside residual waste. This in turn allows: - a further diminution of volumes provided for the collection of residual waste - (though the reduction volume is much less than from bulky dry recyclables), and most importantly, a lower frequency for its collection which further promotes the diversion of putrescibles inside the stream of compostable materials and keeps costs down. 48

49 Simplifying the concept we would say that: The collection of residual waste should therefore consider the adoption of bags or small bins whose volumes depend on the type of dwellings (number of households per each pick-up point). In order to achieve overall savings on the cost side, large-volume containers may be considered only for: - sparsely populated settlements (rural sites) where bring-in schemes make it possible to have a gathering point for various families, thereby avoiding the cost increase which might be related to a collection at the doorstep in such situations. - high-rise buildings with more than 20 families, where a single pick-up for many persons can lead to a sharp reduction of costs for collection Table 5-7. Overview of tools for residual-waste collection Choice Between Using Bins and Bags The choice between bins and bags may be made considering the following: - perceived ease of use for delivering them at the curb; - health aspects and protection from stray cats/dogs (may be important at places); - different methods for collection (hand-loading for bags or mechanical loading for wheeled bins) and the impact on time/costs for each pick-up; - safety for waste collectors (e.g. needles); - possibility to check through the use of transparent PE bags - the type of waste contained (which provides a powerful system to drive the households behaviour and to prevent them from delivering recyclables inside residual waste); - the way the cost for containers is defrayed over time this outlay is made all at once in the case of wheeled bins or bins, but occurs evenly over time in the case of sacks. The choice has to take into account the advantages/drawbacks listed above, as well as: - What is being used in best practice situations, - the fundamental need to keep the perception of the overall collection scheme clean and safe, avoiding the massive release of of bags in front of high-rise buildings; - feedback from the public concerning what is considered acceptable, which has been recorded in many surveys on customer satisfaction. 49

50 Table 5-8. Bins and Bags: Comparison of Advantages (+) and Drawbacks (-) It has to be stressed that switching from collection by means of wheeled bins to a hand loading of bags would enhance the collection efficiency (in terms of the number of pick ups per collector per day), thus contributing to reducing the collection cost. An intermediate result could be to adopt a mixed scheme with: - bags at dwellings with one or a few households (detached or semi-detached hoses, terraced houses); - or small bins up to 100 lt fitted with appropriate transparent bags (to be kept in a common place inside the property and to be placed then at the curb on the collection day); and - wheeled bins and containers at high-rise buildings with more than families, where the longer pick-up time for each bin is more than offset by the number of households that are served with one single bin. This discussion leads us neatly into a discussion of the economics of the different approaches to collection Choosing a Varied Fleet of Collection Vehicles Collection vehicles should be chosen to suit the features of single waste materials, mainly their bulk density. Food waste on its own has a high bulk density (0,6 to 0,7 kg/litre). It does not need compaction. Instead it can be collected and hauled by means of small lorries. This does not apply to schemes where food waste gets collected along with yard waste (whose bulk density ranges from 0.15 to 0.30 kg/litre). The use of small bulk lorries is suitable only when schemes effectively prevent the delivery of garden waste along with food waste. This is one of the reasons for limiting the size of the containers supplied to single households. This very important opportunity is unfortunately neglected in schemes based on joint collection of food and yard waste, as e.g. in most Districts in Central Europe and North America, as houses with gardens are usually provided with a large wheeled bin (80 to 240 litres). Food waste is mixed with a very high percentage of garden waste and therefore the bio-waste has to be collected by compacting vehicles. The significance of being able to shift to small non compacting vehicles for food waste is one of convenience, cost and environmental impact. A small vehicle can if necessary be operated by a single person and limits congestion. 50

51 Figure 5-2. Vehicles for the door to door collection of food waste 5.7 Stabilization of home composting Especially in rural areas home composting is not unknown to people. People do it, because they: - appreciate the beneficial qualities of compost; - don't want to have to transport their garden waste to a collection point; - or have always done it (it is a habit). Experience has shown that the amount of about 30 kg/cap/year of organics discovered in the remaining waste from rural area. This very low amount is due to highly efficient traditional home composting in rural areas. The main task in rural areas is therefore not a reduction of organics, since maintaining the actual status would already be a success. How ever, experience shows that organics 51

52 increase even in rural areas with developing welfare. A motivational campaign in rural areas should help to maintain backyard composting and animal feeding Measures tot stabilize these practices are: - Information campaigns; - Support by providing home and back yard composting systems; - Support by a flexible fee system (in the future) The information campaigns should increase the knowledge and the environmental awareness of the population, that recycling is not only of direct benefit for the households by avoiding costs for fertilizers but as well that any avoided kilogram of organics in the waste is of tremendous importance to keep ground and surface waters clean. Information must also be provided on the negative effects of organics in landfills (leachate, mobilization of heavy metals by organic acids, production of methane and connected with it global climate change) in an understandable way. Figure 5-3. Composter for home composting Usually households do not process the entire amount of bio-waste, which arises in both kitchen and garden. To ensure that home composting makes a relevant contribution to the overall management of bio-waste and to ensure that the activity is performed in an effective manner (to produce a good quality product), it is necessary to carry out public relations work and promotional activity in order to: - tell people about the benefits of home composting for themselves and society - provide advice concerning methods, tools and tips for home composting - convince people to begin home composting, where they have not done so previously - provide background information on the environmental problems of landfills and waste disposal - provide information about the legislative framework, (e.g. waste fees which are more expensive, if people have to order a bio-waste bin) In addition to public relations and promotional activity, some practical tools can help to encourage home composting, and also separate bio-waste collection. Such tools include: - Small bio-waste containers for segregated collection of wastes from the kitchen distributed for free or at low costs (financing with a sponsor) to all households; - bio-waste bags of paper for the kitchen-bin; - compost boxes (or composters); - a shredder service at municipal collection centres, or operated at specific locations on a mobile basis at weekends. In addition to the above, it may be useful to consider establishing networks of community based compost advisers, or so-called Compost Counsellors, or Master Composters, as happens in parts of the United States and Flanders, and in the Lower Austrian example described below. These people may have specific training to enable them to help solve problems in specific neighbourhoods, or they 52

53 may be responsible for showing how to do home composting at demonstration sites established at HWCs. Table 5-9. Typical tools for performing home-composting 5.8 Costs for separate collection systems and home composting Bio-waste collection The costs of implementing separate collection schemes are not straightforward to identify, not least because the options available are numerous with some being more expensive than others. It is important to note that there are numerous permutations available for bio-waste collection. These include the following: - Scope of materials collected can include any combination of garden waste and food waste, sometimes with cardboard included; - Frequency of collections of the bio-waste and the refuse can be such that frequencies are the same, or that the one is greater than the other. This affects the capture of the materials targeted, and the costs of the service; - Vehicles used can include compactors or non compacting trucks with varying loads. The choice reflects the scope of materials (and their bulk density), the frequency of the collection, and the nature of the area being serviced; - Containment methods may include bins, buckets, paper sacks, re-usable sacks, kitchen caddies and paper or starch-based liners, these affect the convenience of the service, and hence also, the capture, as well as being important cost items. One of the issues with costing collection systems is that whether or not the system increases the cost of collection (and the system) depends upon the choice of system. Whether or not adding a collection of food waste, or garden waste, or kitchen and garden waste, will add cost to the collection system also depends on what the system was like before. Although this sounds obvious, it is an important point since introducing collections of bio-waste offers the potential for optimization of collection schemes, especially where putrescible material is targeted. Hence, although it is possible for additional collection services to result in a significant increase in net collection costs, typically, this is a consequence of poor design of the collection service, and failure to optimize the service. 53

54 Successful segregation of the food waste fraction can facilitate a reduction in the required frequency of residual waste collections. This already happens in various municipalities in a number of countries, and is an especially important consideration in hotter climates, where the climate demands more frequent collection of putrescible wastes (though this frequency reduction effect is by no means confined to Southern Member States). The collection of bio-waste will at first be particularly aimed at the suburban areas. Prerequisites are the highest specific amount of organics related tot the private household and good possibilities for running motivational campaigns. In order not to increase substantially the price of waste collection (an increase of 10/ton is assumed) the collection frequency will be reduced. For instance if the household waste bins are emptied twice a week, along with the bio-waste collection, both bins are emptied on a weekly basis, As a result, the collection costs remain almost stable Stabilization of home composting Consideration of the costs of home composting might depend upon the vantage point from which one is making the assessment. For example, from the perspective of a local authority, any outlay used to promote the uptake of home composting might be considered to reduce, at the margin, the costs of collection of waste and its treatment. The actual effect on costs will depend upon the quantitative reduction effect From the perspective of the household, there may be costs borne by the household, but there may also be cost savings if the nature of the system through which households are charged, incentives waste prevention. The nature of home composting equipment will vary across households. In some more rural households, where the quantity of waste suitable for home composting may be significant, the most suitable equipment may be fairly simple to construct from waste materials such as pallets. In other areas, dedicated home composting equipment may be used for the purpose. These are usually (plastic) containers which are intended to form a barrier with the external environment. Home-made boxes may be just as, if not more, effective not least since they provide ready access to the material and make turning relatively straightforward. Arguably, what is rather more important for the success of a home composting programme is the availability of advice and advisors to ensure the process is managed in such a manner that the material will be used by the makers of the compost. If one combines several studies on costs of home composting ( 4-11 per household) with the range of quantities being diverted ( kg/household), then a cost varying between per tonne of waste being home composted is obtained. The costs which home composting helps to avoid depend upon the exact detail of the collection system being used, and the way in which home composting affects participation in the collection scheme. 5.9 Communication on separate collection Successful recycling programs rely on the quality and quantity of materials for recycling, therefore waste separation is an essential prerequisite. Waste separation can be done at the household level and it depends on the willingness of public to conduct the activity. It is perceived to be a big challenge for municipalities in many countries. Municipalities lack knowledge about which communication tools are better to overcome certain barriers. Thus, although public information and promotion is considered to be fundamental to the success of source waste separation programmes, some local authorities do not adequately promote and advertise waste minimization and recycling, or do it in an inefficient way. 54

55 5.9.1 Case study in Ukraine The identified barriers influencing public participation in source waste separation were found to include: lack of environmental knowledge and awareness; lack of responsibility and perceived ability to contribute to the problem; lack of knowledge on "how to separate"; lack of personal incentives and benefits; weak social norms; perceived barriers about situational factors; old habits; and insufficient feedback. The list of communication tools explored includes such approaches as participation in decision making, school education, mass-media, visits to recycling facilities, monetary rewards, prompts, public surveys, goal setting, internet, interpersonal communication, advertising, public commitments etc. For countries with an economy in transition (like Ukraine) and which face waste management problems due to increasing amounts of waste generated and shortage of waste treatment facilities. Although the introduction of source waste separation could decrease the amounts of waste being landfilled and gain material value municipalities in these countries perceive a great difficulty in gaining public participation in waste separation and tend to consider technical solutions. On the other hand the results from the conducted survey and the analysis of major pilot projects on source waste separation in Ukraine have shown that the large majority of population have a positive attitude to source waste separation, ready to try the behaviour on environmental grounds and do not expect financial rewards for it. The analysis of pilot projects shows that source waste separation could gain public participation; however there is a need for continuous and well-planned work on public education and motivation for source waste separation practice. Environmental knowledge of population on waste issues and its negative impacts was found to be rather low and coupled with an out of eyes out of sight mentality. The primary communication tools to eliminate these barriers are organizing surveys as a form of participation in decision making process with provision of balanced information that could raise awareness and help people to realise their role in problem resolution, organising school education in districts where source waste separation is introduced and involving mass media. The important aspect is that the information should be presented in a way to target both responsibility feelings and to show how citizens can contribute to the problem with MSW. Additionally such communication tools as calculation of ecological footprint to show the personal impact on environment, exhibitions aimed to shift paradigm of waste to resource, visits to recycling facilities or video showing how recycling facilities work could also be utilized. Providing straightforward environmental information in promotional materials for the need of waste separation and visits to landfills are considered to be less efficient communication tools. The main personal incentives for source waste separation identified are (1) contribution to the cleanliness of the district and (2) investment of the profits from selling the recyclables into local infrastructure. Personal financial and regulatory measures are least efficient for Ukraine since it is difficult to design such systems and enforce them. The social norms could be enhanced by provision of the results of surveys showing that the majority of citizens support waste separation, which should shift the general opinion that other citizens are not willing to participate. Communication campaign could also include social and environmental advertising, currently almost absent, prompts, posters on the entrances to houses and public events. The two main situational barriers identified are lack of space in the kitchen and refuse chutes in the multi-storied houses. However, it was found that many people already keep paper and glass bottles separate. The first issue could be addressed through personal assistance on how to arrange easy waste separation. The refuse chutes ought to be closed since they constitute a convenient system and pose a challenge to overcome old habit among people. The closing of the refuse chute system should be done with communication based on arguments about the unsanitary conditions and also 55

56 with the fact that caretakers afterwards could spend more time on district cleaning rather than taking out garbage. Among communication approaches, interpersonal communication and involvement of caretakers are appropriate tools to help people arrange their waste separation in an easy way and also identify and overcome other barriers. Providing feedback information is of high importance in Ukraine. Municipalities should provide citizens with achievements and proofs that their participation really helps to solve problems with waste in the cities. The possible benefits of source waste separation cleaner district area or investments in local infrastructure are efficient ways of observable feedbacks to community. The method of goal setting and internet could be used as additionally tools Residents survey Good response to the behaviour and desires of citizens in the area of waste management is needed to improve waste separation. But what does the citizen want? What are the requirements? A well conducted residents study provides these answers. A Dutch guidebook is available that presents a road map and a questionnaire with 185 sample questions, offering: - a checklist to assist with planning and outsourcing of a survey among residents about waste separation and prevention - sample questions that can be used in carrying out your own survey among residents The 10 steps of a residents' survey are as follows 1. Why a survey? 2. Factors to consider outsourcing 3. What kinds of research are there? 4. Determining a sample 5. What is a good questionnaire? 6. Communication prior to the study population 7. Analyzing the data 8. What makes a good report? 9. Citizens informed about the results 10. How to convert the results into policy Dutch best practices in communication on waste separation by municipalities Communication is one of the success factors for a good policy on waste separation. And increasingly becoming more important as citizens are essential in separating various waste fractions. How do you use communication as an instrument to get waste higher on the agenda? How do you ensure that citizens will separate their household waste? And what can you do with limited resources to reach these goals? These are the questions that municipalities encounter in practice and are the basis for the book on communication. The answers to these questions will stimulate encourage and inspire to the reader to critically look at its own contribution communications on waste separation and to review and reshape this. It is not surprising that these questions are more relevant than in the past. The relationship between citizens and government is changing. People do not automatically listen to the government. They are more articulate and daily receive lots of information from a variety of sources. The messages of the municipality must compete with this. This makes high demands on this information and the way it is highlighted. Communication is a key factor in this. Communication offers necessary information to citizens on how the waste is collected and which methods of collection are offered. Communications seduces people to improve their waste separation behaviour. Communication offers insight into human behaviour. Communications explains why people do not (always) do what policymakers want. 56

57 Communication can do a lot but of course it is also limited. Bad policy remains bad policy and clumsy waste containers remain clumsy waste containers, regardless on how it is communicated. Communication does not influence citizens who do not want to and are not able to separate their waste. In that sense, there are limits to the influence of communication Communication campaigns on home composting This paragraph gives several examples of home composting campaigns for Belgium (Flanders), United Kingdom and Spain Flanders, Belgium Belgium promotion of home composting started in In 1998 the Flemish Compost Organisation VLACO established a separate department to actively promote home composting. In 2007 about 41% of the public is practising home composting. A Compost Masters program is the success to home composting in Flanders. Available materials: - Manual Compost Masters (in Dutch). With this manual we focus in the first place to the municipalities and their inter-municipal associations. We will consider what resources the environment- and sustainability officers today have to promote home composting and ecogardening. The Compost Masters are a part of this strategy, but in turn they need resources to perform their voluntary task. - Brochure Composting in a worm bin (in Dutch). "Composting in a worm bin" is the perfect guide if you want to start composting with worms, so-called vermi-composting. You get to know the difference between a composting worm and an earthworm and to get the correct information on the ideal humidity, temperature, air and food in a worm bin. In addition, the various types of worm bins are discussed. We give you the most common errors and solutions, and many practical tips of enthusiastic users. - Brochure Composting in bins and boxes (in Dutch). Contains a basic guide to home composting. What is compost? How does composting work? When to start composting? What animals and micro-organisms are present in your compost pile? What is and what is not compostable? On these and many other questions you get the appropriate answer. And of course, the choice between a bin, box and ile are discussed in detail. - How to use compost? (in Dutch) Leaflet explaining the use of compost - How to make compost? (in Dutch) Leaflet explaining how to make compost United Kingdom UK has a long history of landfilling and only started in the new millennium to actively implement the Landfill directive. One strategy to divert landfilling of biodegradable waste is composting. WRAP (Waste & Resources Action Programme) helps individuals, businesses and local authorities to reduce waste and recycle more, making better use of resources and helping to tackle climate change. WRAP actively supports home composting. Available materials: - Home Composting toolkit guide Guidelines for local advertising and promotion. The brochure features existing advertising and communication material templates and shows you how to adapt them for your own local use. Templates are made available for download. These guidelines are to be used in conjunction with the visual identity guidelines on More information on and - Leaflets: Composting At Home, Composting Know How, Golden Bin competition winner letter: letter with delivery of home composting bin 57

58 - Posters: Dressing the lawn, Getting the right mix, What to compost, Optional accessories, Making the perfect leaf mould, Transform your garden with a compost bin, Fill the bin that makes your garden more beautiful Spain Due to the high degree of self-government enjoyed by the regions in Spain, almost each region has an own history regarding the implementation of home composting and the associated awareness campaigns, even though in general the percentage of rural municipalities active in this field is still low. Pilot projects have been implemented throughout the country in several rural areas or in bigger municipalities which have a high percentage of households with backyard garden. Several home composting manuals can be accessed via internet, and have been produced by regional and local authorities, as well as by NGOs collaborating in the campaigns. The materials used in the campaigns mentioned include i) manual on home composting, ii) several posters, iii) leaflets, iv) videos and appearance in regional TV. Available materials: - Examples of a videos and an appearance in regional TV news: Website from the Regional Environmental Agency of Galicia, which includes examples of campaigning materials to implement home composting: - Home composting website from the county of Guipúzcoa: www4.gipuzkoa.net/medioambiente/compostaje/es/index.asp - Home composting manual of the municipality of Galapagar: - Action plan of the home composting awareness campaign of the municipality of Miranda de Ebro: - Home composting manual from the environmental NGO Ecologistas en Acción : 58

59 6 Biological treatment systems for bio-waste 6.1 Introduction As described in the previous chapter, separate collection of bio-waste is necessary in order to get a proper treatment system and good quality compost. Otherwise the bio-waste will be contaminated. Not only with other major MSW components (glass, plastics, paper and metals) but also with hazardous components like paint, batteries, etc.. The heavy metal content in compost from MSW will be too high and it will be a serious threat to the soil system when applied as compost. In this chapter you find a description of the different treatment methods for bio-waste. These methods comply with the European legislation (Animal By-products order) and much attention is paid to odour control and compost quality. The first part of the chapter pays attention to the general aspects of the biological treatment of bio-waste. The second part describes the different methods. 6.2 Starting points for biological treatment of bio-waste Biological treatment of bio-waste can be carried out in different ways, from very simple to complex. Based on the Dutch context, the basic requirements for treatment are the following: - The technology must comply with the animal by-products order, which means that the material must meet the temperature standards as described in this order. The temperature of the bio-waste must be at least higher than 70 C for 2 hours, or 2 days higher than 60 C or 5 days higher than 55 C. Cross contamination must be avoided. - The following measures need to be taken to avoid odour emissions: o Treatment of process air with a biofilter and/or a wet scrubber combined with a chimney; o Acceptance and pre-treatment of the fresh material takes place in a closed hall that is kept at a negative pressure; o None, or only controlled emissions come out of the pre composting phase. - The produced compost meets the following standards: o A certain degree of maturity (Rottegrad III); o No visible pollution with non biodegradable materials like glass, plastic, stones, metals. The amount of pollution depends very much on the way of collection. In the described methods only standard equipment for the removal of these materials is included. o The size of the end product is < 15 mm. - Measures are taken to avoid the pollution of the environment: o All floors are watertight and excess water is captured and either reused in the process, or transported to a water-treatment plant. Depending on the Macedonian situation, these requirements can be different. 6.3 Aerobic and anaerobic treatment of bio-waste Bio-waste can either be treated under conditions with oxygen (aerobic) or without oxygen (anaerobic). Both methods have its advantages and disadvantages. The biggest advantage of anaerobic digestion (AD) is that besides compost also energy (biogas, electricity, heat) is produced. The advantage of aerobic treatment (composting) is that it is relatively simple. In Table 6-1 below we compare the two methods. 59

60 Table 6-1. Comparison of composting and digestion Aerobic treatment (Composting) Needs oxygen Costs energy (from 10 to 35 kwh per ton) Temperature scale from 35 to 65 C Produces heat Open or closed Minimum 2 phases Investment and running costs relatively low Anaerobic Digestion No oxygen Produces energy About 100 m 3 of biogas per ton Either a mesophilic process (38 C) or a thermophilic process (55 C) Needs heat Closed 1 AD phase, 1 composting phase Higher investment and running costs Both in composting and digestion, organic matter is biodegraded by micro-organisms. The extent of biodegradation depends on the composition of the organic matter. The different stages of composting and digestion are illustrated in Figure 5. Anaerobic Hydrolysis Acidification Solid Monomers organic waste carbohydrates amino acids proteins glucose fats glycerine others fatty acids + O 2 Intermediates alcohols volatile fatty acids others Aerobic CO 2 + H 2 O + NH 3 (C/N <15) + Heat + compost Anaerobic CO 2 + CH 4 + NH digestate Figure 6-1. Pathways of microbial degradation of organic matter by aerobic composting and anaerobic digestion The first stages of both processes are hydrolysis and acidification. In the hydrolysis step organic macromolecules such as carbohydrates, proteins and fats are degraded by microorganisms into monomers. In case of aerobic composting, the monomers are mineralized to carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), water (H 2 O) and heat is produced. Depending on the C/N ratio of the organic waste ammonium (NH 4 + ) can be produced. The produced heat is directly used for water evaporation which results in drying of the organic waste. The final end-product is compost that contains stabilized and partially transformed organic matter, frequently referred to as humus. In case of anaerobic composting, the monomers are mineralized to carbon dioxide, water and methane (CH 4 ). The mixture of gases is called biogas. Anaerobic digestion of organic waste always results in an increase of ammonium. The energy that is produced in anaerobic digestion is stored in methane and as a result of that the organic waste is not dried. The product of digestion (digestate) has to be treated in an additional post-composting step to obtain a dry compost product. The final end-product is more or less similar to compost from aerobic composting. The suitability of organic wastes for composting and digestion depends on the composition of the organic material. In general, structured materials with high ligno-cellulosic content are less readily degradable (producing only small amounts of biogas) under anaerobic conditions and are therefore more suitable for aerobic treatment. Figure 6-2 gives a classification of organic wastes that are suitable for composting and digestion. 60

61 Aerobic composting Anaerobic digestion yard and garden waste biowaste from households fruit and vegetable residuals (e.g. from markets) food residuals (e.g. from restaurants) catering residuals manure sewage sludge physical characteristics increasing moisture content increasing structure biochemical characteristics increasing biological degradation increasing ligno-cellulosic (fiber) content Figure 6-2. Suitability of organic wastes for aerobic composting and anaerobic digestion Anaerobic treatment is preferred for wet, low-structure materials with a high content of readilydegradable organic compounds such as kitchen waste while dry and woody organic wastes like tree branches are more suitable for composting. Anaerobic digestion of dryer waste like bio-waste is done either after an intensive pre-treatment (removal of the inert parts) or in a so-called dry system. The general conclusion is that composting is cheaper and less complicated than anaerobic digestion. Therefore the focus of this report will be mainly on composting. 6.4 Composting Composting can be defined as a controlled aerobic process under thermophilic circumstances (50-60 C). The process is caused by micro-bacterial activities and it leads to the degradation and stabilisation of organic matter. The end product, compost, is used in gardens, in agriculture horticulture and in potting soil. Good compost has an earthy smell and has only little biological activity. Micro organisms break down the organic matter in bio-waste to humus. In nature this process takes more than a year. Under the perfect circumstances in a composting plant the process-time is reduced to only 8-10 weeks. The limiting conditions for a good composting process are the following: - Aerobic circumstances: Anaerobic spots slow the process / cause odour problems: - Water content of about 50%. If the bio-waste is too wet, the oxygen exchange is too little when it is too dry there is insufficient bacterial activity. - C/N-ratio between 20 and 30: When it is too high (too much wood) when it is too low NH 3 - emissions will occur. This means that the bio-waste must be standardized before it is brought to the composting facility. In general this is done by mixing the fresh waste with structure material like screen overflow and woody green waste. 61

62 The way the bio-waste is collected determines the pre treatment. If the bio-waste is mainly kitchen waste, much structure material is needed (more than 50%), if it is a mixture of kitchen and garden waste the amount of structure material depends on the season. In this chapter we will describe an industrial way of composting. Small scale technologies like vermicomposting (with worms) can be interesting, but is more a niche technology. The composting normally takes place in the following steps: Acceptance and Pre-treatment Structure material Pre-composting Structure material Intermediate treatment Final composting Final treatment Metals Compost Plastic, stones, etc Figure 6-3. General scheme of the composting process Reception, pre treatment and screening are carried out in a closed hall. These premises are kept at a negative pressure and the air that comes out is treated in biofilters. The different steps and other necessities for a good composting system are described below. Acceptance and pre-treatment Every truck load with bio-waste is checked during unloading. If it contains more than 5% contaminants the load is refused. After the acceptance procedure the bio-waste is mixed with biowaste. In smaller plants (< t/a) the mixing is done with shovels. On larger sites this is done with a mechanical installation. Depending on the composition of the bio-waste 0 to 50% of structure material needs to be added. Pre-composting This is the most intensive composting phase. In relatively short time much organic matter breaks down. This leads to high temperatures that need to be controlled. In this phase the pathogens and weed seeds are killed. The optimum temperature for composting is between 40 and 60 C. Every 10 degrees higher, doubles the decomposition rate. If the temperature is too high the process stops. A good composting system assures a control of the temperature and aerobic circumstances. Intermediate treatment In this phase the course fraction is screened off. This serves as structure material for the pre composting. The fine fraction is treated in the final composting. In some installations this screening 62

63 is skipped. The advantage of extra screening is that the material is mixed, the C/N-ratio decreases and the fine organic matter gets more concentrated. Often this treatment is also used to remove plastic and metals from the organic material. Final composting The final composting is a more extensive composting phase. Due to the intermediate treatment the temperature rises again above 55 C, what makes it a second sanitation phase. The control system of the final composting is similar to that of the pre-composting. Only the process is slower and takes more time. Final treatment In this treatment the compost is screened off and cleaned from stones and metals. The screen overflow is used as a structure material. Process control The main indicator for process control is the temperature of the material that is composted. Normally the temperature is controlled by increasing or decreasing the airflow. Depending on the composting system, this is partly or fully automated. Most systems with forced aeration also measure the pressure in the airflow. Some intensive tunnel systems recirculate the process-air. Depending on the temperature and the concentration of oxygen outside air is added. Odour control A composting system without odour control is not a good system. Although the compost quality can be fine, the installation is likely to create great inconvenience to the environment. The following measures need to be taken to avoid odour problems: - Good housekeeping. Keep the place clean and respect the correct working methods. - Avoid anaerobic spots in the material that is composted. Essential for achieving this, is that acceptance and pre-treatment are carried out correctly. If the bio-waste is not well mixed with structure material, anaerobic spots will occur. - The reception, pre-treatment and the final screening should take place in a closed premise that is kept at a negative pressure. - No untreated process air is emitted. 6.5 Description of composting systems Introduction As stated before in this report we describe only systems that work on an industrial scale. All systems that mentioned comply with the starting points that are mentioned under 3.2 and all these systems are proven technologies. The minimum size of an installation has a treatment capacity of tons/year. It is impossible to cover all existing composting systems. We have chosen the five main systems. Most other systems are derived from these systems. The degree of automation depends very much on the size of the installation and of the wishes from the client. In small scale installations the pre treatment and screening can be carried out by a shovel and a mobile drum screen. In larger installations it is necessary to design and built full size treatment plants. In this description the six main systems are described. On the market many different suppliers and systems are available, but in general they are varieties of the described systems. The following composting systems are described: Windrow composting 63

64 Cover system Open Cell system Container composting Tunnel composting Hall composting with automatic turning Windrow composting This is the simplest system. This system is only suited for green waste and not for biowaste. When the bio-waste arrives, contaminates are removed and it is mixed with structure material. A shovel brings it to the composting area and sets up the windrows of maximum 2 m high and 6 m wide. To create aeration the material is turned at least twice a week. In smaller installations the turning is carried out by a shovel, in larger installations with a turning machine. This system can be improved by combining it with an aeration system. Figure 6-4. Windrow with turner and forced aeration The composting installation consists of the following elements: - Reception, pre-treatment and screening area; - Composting area with windrows (with aeration gutters and fans); - Storage area compost; - Water capture. This system has the following advantages and disadvantages: Advantages Simple technology Possible for small scale and large scale installations Energy costs low Investment and running costs relatively low Disadvantages Longer composting time Influence of external climate Odour emissions may occur while turning Only suited for green waste The Cover system This is a windrow system with forced aeration. To avoid the emission of smell the windrows are covered with a membrane cover. This cover protects the composting material from the penetration of rainwater and allows CO 2 and water vapour produced during the process to escape. On the inside of the cover a fine film of condensation develops during the composting process. This suppresses odours and other gaseous substances like VOC. The vast majority of these gases are dissolved in the film of water and drop back into the composting material, where they continue to be broken down by micro organisms. The process is controlled by increasing or decreasing the airflow through the windrow. The process temperature is measured by probes inside the heap. Depending on this temperature the airflow is regulated. 64

65 Figure 6-5. The Cover system When the bio-waste arrives contaminates are removed and it is mixed with structure material. A shovel brings it to the composting area and sets up the windrows. When the windrow is finished the windrows are covered with the membrane and the aeration fans are started up. After four weeks the cover is removed and the heap is turned. On bigger installations the turning and the removal of the cover is done fully automatic. The final composting takes another 4 weeks. Depending on the installation, the final composting is carried out under a cover or in the open air. The composting installation consists of the following elements: - Reception, pre-treatment and screening hall; - Windrow composting, with aeration gutters and fans; - Storage area compost; - Water capture. This system has the following advantages and disadvantages: Advantages Disadvantages Relatively simple Lot of handling Low energy consumption If the removal of the cover is automated, great increase in costs. Low investment costs Cover is expensive Low running costs Limited process control Limited odour control The main advantages of this system are the low costs and its simple set up. The main disadvantage is the handling of the cover. This can be automated, but will lead to a great increase of the investment and running costs. Odour control and process control is a lot better than with a conventional windrow composting, but not as good as with the other composting systems Open Cell system In this system the bio-waste is treated in composting cells of three meters high. These cells are placed in the open air, in an open shed or in a closed hall. The main feature of this system is that process air is drawn through the heap, so no smelly process air can escape. This air is transported to an air treatment chamber, where the air is cooled down to 38 C and then to a biofilter. The air treatment system is fully automated. The composting cells of both the pre- and final composting are equipped with an aeration floor. This can be a floor with flexible pipes, a spigot floor or aeration gutters. Process control takes place by increasing or decreasing the airflow through the heap. The process temperature is measured in the airflow. This gives a good indication of the average temperature inside the heap. Depending on this temperature the airflow is regulated. 65

66 Pre composting Air treatment and biofilters Figure 6-6. The Open Cell system After the reception of the bio-waste, plastics and other contaminates are removed and it is mixed with structure material. A shovel brings it to the composting area and fills the pre-composting cells. To avoid emission of process air to the outside, the aeration is started directly. After 3 to 4 weeks the shovel picks up the material and brings it to the screening hall. The fine fraction (< 60 mm) is brought to the final composting. The course material is used a structure material, to create an airy mixture in the pre composting. After 5 weeks of final composting, the compost is screened off. The compost overflow is used as a cover on the pre-composting material. The composting installation consists of the following elements: - Reception, pre-treatment and screening hall; - Pre composting cells, final composting cells; - Air treatment installations and biofilters; - Storage area compost; - Water capture. This system has the following advantages and disadvantages: Advantages Disadvantages Simple technology Composting time longer than tunnel system Possible for small scale and large scale installations Influence of external climate Energy costs relatively low No air recirculation Investment and running costs relatively low Much structure material is needed Full process control Complete air treatment system. Complete system with both a controlled pre- and final composting This is a relatively simple system, with a full process control and air treatment. This makes it possible to make a profitable exploitation, also for small scale installations Container composting In this system the bio-waste is treated in modified insulated sea containers. This is a completely closed in vessel system. The air is pushed through the material inside the container and, depending on the oxygen content and temperature, circulated in the same or in a neighbouring container. Because of this recirculation process, the process air is heavily contaminated with odour components and ammonia. Therefore it is necessary to treat the off gasses in a wet scrubber and a biofilter. Often these biofilters are also placed inside containers. Circulation of process air has as an advantage that less air is to be treated. Process control and air treatment are fully automated. The amount of fresh air that is introduced depends on the temperature and the concentration of oxygen in the process air. 66

67 The composting containers Unloading of a container Figure 6-7. The container system The reception and pre-treatment is more or less the same as with the Open cell-system. In some installations the bio-waste is shredded. Loading of the containers is done with a shovel and a dosing hopper and conveyor belt. Often the container is charged inside the reception hall. A truck transports it to the composting platform where it is connected to the aeration system. After two weeks the truck picks it up and unloads the container. The final composting is often a classic windrow system in the open air or in a shed. The composting installation consist of the following elements - Reception, pre-treatment and screening hall; - A truck to transport the containers back and forward; - Composting containers; - A wet scrubber and biofilters; - Area for final composting (windrows); - Storage area compost; - Water capture. Advantages Completely automated Possible for small scale installations Recirculation of process air Closed, in vessel system Independent from outside climate Full process control Complete air treatment system. Disadvantages Investment costs relatively high Handling with truck Final composting on windrows Energy costs relatively high Tunnel Composting This is one of the most wide spread composting systems in north Western Europe. It is a completely closed in vessel system what is available in many varieties. Most tunnels are concrete boxes of 6 to 8 m wide, 6 m high and 15 to 40 m long. The aeration system and the air treatment are very much as described in the paragraph about container composting. Air is recirculated as much as possible in the tunnels. This makes it possible to create optimum circumstances for composting inside the tunnel. Process air is mostly washed in a scrubber and then treated in a biofilter. Automated process control is one of the main features of this system. The aeration floors are equipped with a so called spigot system. Under the concrete floor lays a system of aeration pipes. These pipes lay 40 to 50 cm apart. The spigots that are connected to the piping system assure an equal aeration. To keep the holes open, the spigots are placed under small gutters. These kinds of floors are also used in other systems, like the open cell system. 67

68 Figure 6-8. The tunnel composting system The reception and pre-treatment is more or less the same as with the previous systems. In some installations the pre-treatment is skipped and the material is charged directly into the tunnels. The pre-composting takes usually between 1 and 2 weeks. Than the material is picked up brought directly to the maturation tunnels, where it stays another 2 to 3 weeks. After this the compost is screened off. In some cases the final composting is carried in an Open Cell like system or with windrows. The composting installation consist of the following elements - Reception, pre-treatment and screening hall; - Pre and final composting tunnels; - A wet scrubber and biofilters; - Storage area compost; - Water capture. Advantages Completely automated Recirculation of process air Closed, in vessel system Independent from outside climate Full process control Complete air treatment system. Disadvantages Investment costs relatively high Energy costs relatively high Hall Composting with automatic turning With this system the material is after a pre-treatment brought into a closed hall. Depending on the system the material is turned once or twice a week. With every turn the bio-waste moves a bit further inside the hall. When it reaches the end, the material is mature and the compost can be screened of. Often this system is combined with an aeration system. This system is available in many versions. In general there are two systems: systems with a fixed turner and systems with a mobile turner. The fixed systems, with the so called Wendelin turning wheel, were developed in the 1980 s and successfully implemented in the 90 s when separate collection and treatment of bio-waste became common in Holland and Germany. The Wendelin turning system works fully automatically, the turning wheel works itself through the material. The 68

69 advantage of this system is that by turning the material regularly it stays open and loose. So water and air can circulated freely. The disadvantage is that a big and expensive steel construction has to function in a very corrosive environment. Systems with mobile turners look very much like green composting systems. This is a windrow system with forced aeration inside a closed hall. A mobile turner drives over the windrow and turns it. Here the climate inside the hall (fog) makes the working conditions difficult. Figure 6-9. Hall composting The reception and pre-treatment is more or less the same as with the previous systems. The biowaste mixed with structure material is charged automatically inside the treatment hall. Air is pushed through the waste continuously. The material is turned once or twice a week. The total composting time inside the hall depends varies from 4 to 12 weeks. It depends whether the system is used as a pre-composting or a total composting system. The regular turning assures aerobic circumstances throughout the heap and a good mixing of the material. This way one is sure that all the material reaches the right temperatures, so an optimum hygienisation is assured. Because of irregular irruptions of smelly components when the material is turned, this system demands a lot from the air treatment system. The composting installation consist of the following elements - Reception, pre-treatment and screening hall; - Composting hall; - Turning system; - A wet scrubber and biofilters; - Storage area compost; - Water capture. Advantages Disadvantages Completely automated Investment costs high Recirculation of process air Energy- and running costs high Closed system Air treatment has to deal with irregular odour eruptions Aerobic circumstances assured Hostile climate inside composting hall Optimum hygienisation of the bio-waste Complete air treatment system Conclusions The table below gives a short outline of the different systems. 69

70 Cover system Open cell system Container composting Capacity (ton/year) Composting time 8-9 weeks 8 weeks 2 weeks (excl. final composting) Composting stages 4 weeks precomposting, 4 weeks postcomposting 3 weeks pre- 2 weeks precomposting, 5 composting, 5 weeks postcomposting weeks postcomposting (windrows) Tunnel composting Hall composting weeks 10 weeks 1 week precomposting, 2 hall 2 weeks,, Total time in weeks postcompostincomposting 8 weeks post- in windrows. Aeration Pressure aeration Negative aeration Pressure aeration Pressure aeration Pressure aeration + regular turning Air treatment Membrane cover filtrates air Air cooling (outside air or water) and by filter. Scrubber biofilter and Scrubber and biofilter Scrubber and biofilter Composting reactor Aerated windrows covered with a membrane. Composting Closed cells, with an containers, aeration floor. recirculation of Either outside process air. or inside a hall (depends on Closed Closed hall, tunnels, aeration floor aeration floor, and automatic recirculation turner. of process air. climate and permits). Energy consumption Investment treatment costs and Windrow composting is not mentioned, while it is not suited for bio-waste. All other systems comply with the EU regulations and all systems are proven technologies. All systems produce good compost and have an installation to control odour emissions. The Cover system and the Open Cell system are both relatively simple compared to the other systems. The container and tunnel systems have an advanced aeration system, which shortens the composting time. The hall system with automatic turner mixes the waste continuously, what improves the process and the hygienisation. The choice for a system depends very much on the local situation. The following circumstances must be taken into account: - Amount of waste: for small quantities only the Cover system and Open Cell system are able to handle the waste for a reasonable price; - Available space: the tunnel and container system have relatively short composting time, and use therefore less space; - Permit: depending on the location of the installation the permit may prescribe that the composting must take place inside a closed hall or vessel. 6.6 Costs of composting It is not possible to compare the different systems on investment costs and operational (running) costs. What is the best system depends very much on the amounts of waste and the local situation. In general the Open cell-system and the Cover system are the cheapest on investment. But if there is only little space available, or the ground prices are high. A tunnel system can be a better solution. 70

71 The amount of waste also has a great influence on the price. With large quantities of waste it is possible to invest more. The Open cell-system and the Cover-system can both be designed for relatively small and large amounts of waste. The automatic turning system inside a closed hall can only be realized for large quantities of waste Fixed costs The fixed costs are related to the investment costs and consist of costs for interest and depreciation and amortisation. The investment costs for the Cover-system and the VAR-system are the lowest. The costs for the Cover-system depend very much on the scale of automation. On large scale installations the covering, on-covering, turning and humidification are carried out in one go, with one installation. This installation combined with the high costs for the cover increase the investment costs a great deal. The VAR-system is relatively cheap, because it also functions in the open air or in an open shed. If the permit requires a closed hall, the investment costs will increase accordingly. The container system is also available for small quantities of waste. The investment costs are however relatively high. The containers are completely isolated and they are equipped with a complex air treatment installation. Transport of the containers is carried out with trucks. In some installations the transport of the containers is fully automated, without trucks. A very robust system is the composting tunnels. These tunnels are air tight and isolated. This makes the construction costs per tunnel high. This is partly compensate by the fact that the composting time is short, so fewer tunnels are needed. The automatic turning system inside a closed hall is the most expensive system. The hall is air tight and kept at a negative pressure. The investment costs for the turner are also high, especially if it is an automatic turner Running costs The running costs consist mainly out of the following parts: Driving equipment Labour Energy costs Water management costs Maintenance of the air treatment installations Maintenance costs Driving equipment; All installations need up to tons a year one shovel for the activities on the composting site. The hall system with the automatic turner needs the shovel a little less than the other types of installation, because part of the internal transport is done with the turner. The container system also needs the assistance of an extra truck to transport the containers. Labour; The cover system needs an extra labour to manipulate the covers. With the hall system a little less labour is needed. Energy costs; The Cover system is the lowest on energy costs. This is because the air is pushed slowly through the cover and no extra air treatment is applied. The Open Cell system consumes about 20 KWh per ton bio-waste, a tunnel system about 35 kwh. It is assumed that the other system use the same amount of energy as the tunnels. Water management costs; These costs depend very much on the local situation. In area s where it rains a lot, the composting area should be covered. Also because the run off from the storage area 71

72 is polluted as well. Most systems will be able to have a closed water balance. With the Cover system this seems to be difficult, because it is not possible to add water from the outside. Maintenance of the air treatment installations; The biofilters need to be renewed every 3 years. More intensive systems also need to add scrubbers to condition the air. The air treatment of the Open Cell system is as simple as effective. The air is cooled down with outside air and purified in a biofilter. With the cover system, the cover serves as a biofilter. This cover needs to be replaced about once every 10 years. This is a costly affair. Maintenance costs; These costs depend very much on the degree of automation. The maintenance costs of the hall system are high, because the key component (the turner) is always working is an extremely corrosive environment Total treatment costs The treatment costs for the different system are estimated as follows: System Estimated costs ( /ton) Cover system Open Cell system Tunnel system Container system Hall system with automatic turner The costs estimation is based on the situation in North-Western Europe. 6.7 Anaerobic digestion Anaerobic digestion takes place under mesophilic (38 C) or thermophilic (55 C) conditions. To favour a good sanitation of the waste most systems for bio-waste work under thermophilic circumstances. The end products of AD are biogas and digestate. This material contains much water and ammonium. It must therefore be composted afterwards in one of the systems as described previously. The AD-process takes about 3 weeks. After this a composting process of 3 to 5 weeks is needed to turn the material into compost. There are two main systems for AD: a wet system (5 to 20% of dry matter) and a dry system (30 to 40% of dry matter). The problem with AD of bio-waste is the inert fraction. In a wet system this settles in the digestion tank. This means that the inert fraction must be washed out before it enters the tank. In a dry system, the inert material stays connected to the organic matter, and works itself through the reactor. There is also a choice between batch reactors and plug flow reactors. As the different possibilities show AD is much more complex than composting. This is partly due to the fact that the process takes place under anaerobic conditions and because the limiting conditions are much more critical. Composting is a thermophilic process. If the temperature is a bit to high or to low, this will only slow down the process. If this happens with AD, it will kill the process. The limiting conditions for AD are the following: - Anaerobic circumstances - Temperature 38 C or 55 C - ph Water content depends on the system - Structure material to favour the circulation of gas and water - Inoculation with micro organisms 72

73 The big advantage of AD is the production of biogas. This gas can be transformed into electricity and heat or into gas for the national grid. Whether investing in AD is profitable depends very much on the price for green energy General treatment steps for Anaerobic Digestion The following steps are usually taken in an AD-plant. Acceptance and pre treatment The acceptance procedure is similar to composting. The pre treatment depends very much on the AD system. In a dry system the bio-waste is usually shredded and screened at 50 mm, which is treated in the digester. The screen overflow is for composting. In a wet system the material is shredded as well and than it goes to a pulper and an installation to remove the inert materials (sand, stones, glass, etc.). If the input stream is wet food and restaurant waste, it is only mixed with digestate. In a batch system the fresh bio-waste is mixed with inoculated structure material and brought to the AD tunnels. Digestion reactor In the reactor, or in a mixer just before the reactor, the bio-waste is mixed with digestate and press water to get the right density and to inoculate the fresh material with the right micro organisms. The fermentation process takes (depending on the process) between 2 and 3 weeks. Important is creating the proper mesophilic (25-35 o C) or thermophilic (55-65 o C) conditions in the reactor. Intermediate treatment In most systems it is necessary to press out the water. Part of this water is reused in the process. The surplus can be used as an organic fertiliser in agriculture. The dry fraction (about 40% dm) is mixed with structure material for composting. Final composting The digestate is relatively mature. Composting is needed to get rid of the smell and to evaporate the water. Therefore sufficient structure material is necessary for a good aeration. It can be treated in one of the systems as prescribed before. Final treatment The end product will be compost. Process control With AD a good process control is essential. Temperature, PH, moisture content, etc. are registered and monitored continuously. Energy recovery There are three ways to use the biogas as an energy source. The simplest way is to burn it and to use the heat for some process or for heating. The most common way is to burn the gas in a cogeneration plant. Such an installation produces both electricity and heat. The third way is to treat the gas. Components like CO 2, water damp and H 2 S are removed. The methane gas can be sold as natural gas or as transport gas. All technologies are proven. The choice depends on the local circumstances and the prices that are paid for green electricity and green gas. Odour control Although AD always takes place under closed circumstances, it may cause problems with smell. When the digestate leaves the reactor it may emit ammonia and it smells like sewage sludge or manure. This smell breaks down quickly in an aerobic composting process. It is therefore important to mix it well with structure material and to bring it to the final composting. The intermediate treatment must be carried out in a closed hall. 73

74 While the systems differ so much it is not possible to give an general lay out of an AD-plant Description of AD-systems In general there are three types of AD-systems: - Wet fermentation systems - Tunnel systems - Dry fermentation systems Wet fermentation is mainly used for sludge, manure and food waste. If this system is used for biowaste an extensive pre treatment is needed. In that case much attention is paid to the pre-treatment of the waste. Inert materials and plastics must be removed before entering the reactor. The pre treatment can be done by pressing out the water fraction, or by washing and pulping the bio-waste. The problem with sand removal is, that this never works to the full extend. Some sand will enter the reactor and settle inside. There are two types of tunnel digesters. The most common way is a batch like reactor. The biowaste is mixed with structure material and old digestate and than loaded into the reactor. During the process much water is added. After 2 to 3 weeks off gases from the co generation plant is pushed through the material to evacuate the biogas. Then the material is removed for the final processing. The second tunnel system is an indirect digesting system. The bio-waste in the reactor is humidified during the first 3 to 5 days of the process. This water absorbs the fatty acids and other biological components. This water is treated in an anaerobic reactor. The advantage is that after the humidification period the aeration is started and the material is composted directly in the same tunnel. Dry fermentation systems are especially developed for the treatment of bio-waste. The systems work with a high dry matter content (>30%). The advantage is that sand and other contaminants will not settle in the reactor, because they stay connected with the organic matter. At the end of the process the material is pressed and separated into a dry and a wet fraction. Wet fermentation Tunnel fermentation Tunnel fermentation Dry fermentation (batch) (humidification) Capacity (t/y) Pre treatment Pressing or sand Shredding of biowaste Shredding Shredding or washing and pulping and mixing screening with > 50% of digestate Fermentation time 2-3 weeks 2-3 weeks 2-3 weeks 2-3 weeks Final treatment No final treatment, Screening and Screening and Pressing and digestate directly to composting composting composting agriculture Gas production Investment and treatment costs Conclusions All systems can be seen as proven technologies. The choice of a system depends very much on the local situation. If a tunnel composting is already in operation, this can be transformed into an ADsystem. A wet system can be combined with an existing wet system. 74

75 The dry systems have the highest gas production, because all the bio-waste is being treated. In the wet system much organic matter is removed in the pre treatment phase. The disadvantage of the batch tunnel system is that the system is stopped every time after 3 weeks and it has to be started up every time with the filling of the tunnel. The humidification system is really a derived system. Only the leachate water passed through the AD-reactor is treated. The system is simple, but the gas production is much lower compared to the other systems. 75

76 7 Compost: markets for application, standards and certification 7.1 Introduction At the moment there are no binding EU standards for compost but several EU member states already have their own system for compost standards in place. It is not yet clear in which way EUwide compost standards will be laid down in legislation, either in a new Bio-waste directive, under article 6 of the new WFD or as part of the sewage sludge directive. This chapter describes the most likely way compost standards will develop. The development is based on two recent studies: - End-of-Waste Criteria by the Institute for Prospective Technological Studies of the European Commission Joint Research Centre (JRC-IPTS). The results for compost are from an external study by Organic Recovery & Biological Treatment Association (ORBIT) together with the European Compost Network (ECN) Compost production and use in the EU (2008); - Assessment of the options to improve the management of bio-waste in the EU by Arcadis/Eunomia (2009) prepared for the impact assessment of the bio-waste directive. 7.2 Legal standards for compost Introduction Compost from bio-waste can be used as soil improver and natural fertiliser. The biological conversion of bio-waste can be established by aerobic composting or anaerobic digestion. Advantages of the use of compost on arable land are: - organic matter has a positive effect on the structure of the soil, thereby improving tilth, aeration, and retention of moisture; - organic matter has a nutritive function: it is a source of nutrients and trace metals, and regulates the supply of nutrients from other sources in the soil; - organic matter has a positive effect on the activity of microflora and microfaunal organisms. However, application of compost to the soil is also of great concern because the frequent supply of compost may lead to the accumulation of heavy metals and other (organic) pollutants in the soil. Increased levels of heavy metals in topsoil due to atmospheric deposition from industrial activities and input via fertilisers, pesticides and animal manure have already been observed. Therefore, the heavy metal content of composts should be limited in order to guarantee the safe use of compost. Standards on the use and quality of compost exist in most Member States. However, these standards may differ substantially, partly due to differences in soil policies. For most EU countries, standards are developed for compost derived from bio-waste and specific materials are excluded from the collection scheme (in 11 countries among which Belgium (Flanders), Germany, Netherlands and United Kingdom). Spain and France are countries which have compost standards but which do not exclude mixed waste from the scope of their compost standards. Standards play a dual role: - They help protect the environment through implementing what is effectively a precautionary approach to the regulation of compost and its application; - They can constitute part of the system whereby the producers of compost can develop a more sound marketing strategy in the face of what are often negative perceptions of compost, and where some potentially important end-users may have little familiarity of the material. 76

77 7.2.2 Country specific The quality criteria for compost vary in the European countries concerning the amount, the requirements and the limited values (see Table ). Direct quality classes based on heavy metal limits exist only in Austria (class I and II such as the types "A" fresh and "B" matured compost). A quality standard with two steps in Belgium, with composts for arable land and for other areas, did not prove to be practicable, thus composts can be distinguished only on a raw material basis. In the Netherlands, two classes of compost were distinguished (clean compost and compost) but this also did not prove to work in practice. Evidence has been made that only the best compost will be asked for. Quality classes based on raw material (Belgium/Fl), on the properties or the ranges of utilisation (Germany) will more effectively meet the requirements of the compost market. Table 7-1. Classification of compost quality in Europe Country Austria Belgium/Fl Denmark Germany Netherlands Sweden Type of compost/quality class Quality Class A+ (organic farming), Class A (high quality) and Class B (minimum quality/non food production areas) Yard and Vegetable, Fruit and Garden VFG Compost Organic household waste compost with no classification up to now. No quality criteria for green/yard waste compost necessary Fresh and matured compost, mulch and potting soil compost solid and liquid digestion residues Compost Very fresh, fresh and matured compost Heavy metal contents With the stipulation of the quality criteria various philosophies are to be observed. Here we have countries such as Austria or the Netherlands with relatively severe guidelines e.g. concerning heavy metals on the one hand and on the other hand relatively high deviations (40 to 50 %) from the guide values which are allowed for the single case. These are confronted with the German guide values with relatively moderate values, but relatively little deviations of only 15 % (see Table 7-2). 77

78 Table 7-2. Heavy metal limits in various EU countries (mg/kg dry matter) Country Quality Standard of Cd Cr Cu Hg Ni Pb Zn AT Bio-waste Ordinance Class A , BE Agricultural Ministry DK Agricultural Ministry , D Bio-waste Ordinance Type II IRE Draft LUX Environmental Ministry NL Compost , ES Class A (draft) SWE Quality assurance organisation UK TCA Quality Label The guide values have proved in practice to be more efficient than the stipulation of absolute limited values. Compost plants have little influence on the input material so that a certain deviation of the quality criteria in the single case and after control should be allowed. Especially with very low limited values the compost plants are producing a compost quality which is ranging at the limit. After the composting has finished it can be analysed finally whether the compost end product fulfils the requirements or not. Only a possible deviation for the single case gives the compost plant a certain security for their production Organic pollutants At the moment only Denmark is worried about organic pollutants in compost and has fixed limits. The other countries have detected very low levels, so no analysis is made for the contamination (Netherlands, Belgium) or they do a kind of observation in suspicious cases (Austria) or on a voluntary basis (Germany) Hygienic requirements Hygienic requirements for compost and composting facilities are laid down in the Animal by-products regulation (EC No. 1774/2002). The European Commission/DG is now continuing the work on the implementation rules of the revised Animal by-products Regulation. Currently the experts are working in a commitology procedure on the important annexes which include the specific requirements for the sanitisation in the practice of biological treatment (compost and biogas plants). In Austria the composting process has to be controlled after the first running of the plant and after each essential change of the equipment. During the regular decomposition process the temperature in the composted material has to reach 64 C over 4 days. In Germany the selected decomposition process must lead to a sanitized product and assure the exclusion of germs. The compost plant must be able to prove the hygienic effectiveness which is normally done by a daily temperature recording. The temperature level has to show in open composting systems more than 55 C over two weeks or 65 C over one week, in closed systems one week with more than 60 C is sufficient. With the new German Bio-waste Ordinance the epidemic and phytohygienical clearance of products from biological waste treatment are stated by a direct and an indirect process control together with end product tests (on salmonella). No hygienic standards exist until now in Belgium. Denmark defines two standardised process types which should guarantee sanitation. Controlled composting has to show the over 55 C during more 78

79 than two weeks, controlled deactivation takes place after one hour at 70 C. Because of the variations in the technology of the composting plants a new regulation for hygienic aspects was laid down in the Netherlands in The former standardised general process parameters (minimum 8 weeks composting, and from these 4 weeks intensive with aeration and re-stacking twice, C temperature) which guarantee hygiene efficiency are replaced by an individual solution for every composting plant. The Dutch independent certification organisation KIWA strongly supervises the strict adherence to the therefore required process parameters. In future an extension of the hygienic requirements in Europe can be expected. Thus the latest draft of the new German compost ordinance asks for a hygienic process test of the total compost plant every two years. Austria is likely to follow this example and plans according to a draft version of the new Austrian compost decree an additional hygienic control of compost bags at the point of sale Additional quality aspects The fulfilment of the requirements for heavy metals, organic pollutants, hygienic requirements and further characteristics are the preconditions for the award of a certificate (Netherlands) or of a compost quality label (Austria, Belgium/FL, Germany, Sweden). These additional quality criteria concern impurities (plastics, metals, glass, and stones), organic matter, plant compatibility, degree of decomposition, salt and water content. The detailed declaration of the contents of the compost to be sold is of a great importance in all countries. Only with the exact knowledge of the characteristics compost can be used successfully Comparison with standards for sewage sludge The Sewage Sludge Directive (86/278/EEC) seeks to encourage the use of sewage sludge in agriculture and to regulate its use in such a way as to prevent harmful effects on soil, vegetation, animals and man. For this, limit values for concentrations of heavy metals in sewage sludge intended for agricultural use and in sludge-treated soils are in Annexes I A, I B and I C of the Directive. The application of sludge is prohibited where the concentrations of heavy metals in the soil are exceeded. Table 3 shows the limit values of six heavy metals in soil, sewage sludge and the maximum load. Table 7-3. Limit values for heavy metals in soil, in sludge for use and annual load for use in agriculture Heavy metal Soil (mg/kg dm) Sludge (mg/kg dm) Load (kg/ha/year) Cd Cr Cu ,000-1, Ni Pb , Zn ,500-4, Table 7-4 shows the limit values for heavy metals in sewage sludge for use in agriculture. 79

80 Table 7-4. Limit values for heavy metals in sewage sludge in USA (mg/kg dm) Country Quality Standard of Cd Cr Cu Hg Ni Pb Zn USA EPA CRF40/503 Sludge Rule Table 7-2 shows that the standards for heavy metals in compost are most strict in the Netherlands than in other EU countries. Comparison of Table 7-2 with Table 7-3/Table 7-4 shows that standards for heavy metals in sewage sludge are several orders of magnitude higher for both EU and in the USA. However, application of sewage sludge in EU is limited as also standards apply for maximum contents in the soil. The differences in heavy metal standards between compost and USA standards for sewage sludge are due to the fact that different approaches are applied to set up the heavy metal standards. In the Netherlands, the metal balancing approach is applied that tries to match the metal inputs to soil to the small losses of metals due to crop removal, soil erosion and leaching. The USA set up their metal limits based on toxic effects on soil micro-organisms under field conditions. It is suggested to use the same limit values for heavy metals in compost as for sewage sludge. Comparison of limit values for heavy metals in bio-waste compost and sewage sludge shows a large discrepancy between the limit values. It is not advised to adopt the limit values from sewage sludge but keep close to the values as proposed in the report for the impact assessment of the bio-waste directive Assessment of the options to improve the management of bio-waste in the EU (Arcadis, 2009) and applied by other EU countries Effect of separate collection on compost quality From a historical perspective, the main argument for implementing separate collection of bio-waste was the poor quality of compost from mixed waste. Although the treatment of the waste may have proved possible, deriving a useful product from the mixed waste stream proved more problematic. Compost derived from mixed municipal wastes tended to suffer from problems of physical impurities, and were shown to have higher concentrations of potentially toxic elements than those materials derived from source separated bio-waste. This effectively gave the products of composting a very poor image in the eyes of potential end users. Table 7-5 presents the heavy metal content of composts derived from municipal solid wastes (MSW) which were prepared in three different ways: - MSW compost: obtained from MSW which is integrally collected; the compost (organic fraction) is mechanically separated after composting; - OFMSW compost: obtained from MSW which is integrally collected; the organic fraction (OFMSW) is mechanically separated before composting; - bio-waste compost: obtained from the organic fraction of municipal solid waste which is separated at the source before composting. Table 7-5. Heavy metal (mg/kg of dry matter) of different types of MSW-derived composts Heavy metal MSW compost OFMSW compost Bio-waste compost Cd Cr Cu Ni Pb Zn

81 Table 7-5 shows that heavy metals in compost are significantly reduced when the organic fraction is separated before composting. An even greater reduction is achieved when the organic fraction of MSW is source-separated before composting. This shows that composts derived from source segregated materials have much lower levels of contamination from potentially toxic elements, such as metals and organic pollutants. One of the roles of compost standards is to play a defensive role on the part of the environment in seeking to ensure that what is applied to land minimises the likelihood of applications of compost leading to a build up of these elements in the soil such that they reach levels where the land might not be considered fit for cultivation of agricultural crops. In addition, standards, when coupled with Quality Assurance Systems (QASs), can assist in the development of markets for compost where the standards are set in such a way that those outputs meeting the standard can effectively give reassurance to end-users that the compost is of a specified quality. This, in conjunction with the development of separate collection of bio-waste, has demonstrated its effectiveness in creating the necessary confidence on the part of consumers, a precondition for the acceptance of in the waste derived compost material and composting as a whole. 7.3 Compost use and markets Compost marketing shows several trends in Europe as shown in Table 18. Green compost, i.e. compost made from green waste, is an organic fertiliser and soil conditioner accepted by the markets all over Europe. It can be produced in a good quality without much technical equipment. For the compost made from bio-waste, the market shows two contrary developments: 1. Due to low tipping fees, some of the composting plants try to minimise their treatment and marketing costs which results mostly in delivering the compost free of charges to farmers without additional marketing efforts; 2. On the other hand a lot of composting plants start to add value to their compost products and produce mixtures or special products according to customer s needs and market requirements. The quality assurance organisations support these tendencies in organising research projects for compost application and for new compost products. Table 7-6. Market shares of compost sales in EU (in %); status 1999 to 2001 Market AT 2000 BE (Fl) 2000 D 1999 Landscaping DK NL IT LUX FR AT Landfill Restoration Agriculture Special cultures Horticulture Earth works Private gardens Export Miscellaneous There are significant differences on the market situation in the different EU countries. Generally it can be recognised that even in the developed countries with a circumstantial compost production like Germany the feared problems with compost sales did not occur. In all countries hobby gardening, horticulture and landscaping are successful markets and has good developing chances. 81

82 Figure 7-1 gives a European perspective on ranges of value (and market size) for composted materials. It can be seen that there are a variety of uses for compost with different potential market sizes. Figure 7-1. Compost marketing hierarchy indicating market prices and volumes (note: prices are known ranges for compost products within the market segment, in /m³) 7.4 Compost marketing and need for a quality assurance system Marketing and public relation of compost requires a standardised quality product. Composts which have been tested in a quality assurance system meet these requirements because: - Quality assurance is a good basis for sales promotion, for public relations work and a good argument for the building up of confidence in compost; - The quality label allows the establishment of a branded "quality-tested compost" and a positive compost image; - Regular analyses during compost production guarantee a quality-assured product; - Standardised analyses carried out in accordance with specified methods enable a nation-wide objective assessment of the compost; - The investigation results form a basis for the product declaration and the application recommendations; The result is a compost of defined quality which is therefore marketable and saleable on a large scale. Further marketing activities are necessary, as compost with a quality label or a quality certificate will not be sold by itself. With this qualification, however, the compost plants have an excellent start because quality products always have advantages in the market. In order to compete with the activities of the peat-, soil- and bark industries the compost plants need to undertake common efforts in their marketing activities on a similar level. The quality assurance organisations (e.g. the compost quality assurance organisation in Germany, KGVÖ in Austria, VLACO in Belgium, VA in the Netherlands) support the compost plants in their joint marketing activities. It is neither necessary nor financially sensible that each compost producer develops its own marketing instruments. 82

83 The marketing measurements in the individual EU countries vary decisively in size and volume. There are only actions in countries with a developed compost management. An advantageous start of a marketing strategy is to build up a quality assurance/certification with recommendations for the use of compost for the most important ranges of product sales. Examples: user brochures of the German Compost Quality Assurance Organisation, 2-volume guidelines for practical use of compost of VLACO in Belgium, 6 user information sheets of the KGVÖ in Austria. Additionally, the Belgium VLACO supports a row of tests for the use of compost. Many investigations in Europe indicate that quality and marketing of the end product is the most crucial composting issue. Both producers and users are of the opinion that a sustainable recycling of organic wastes demands clear regulations regarding what is suitable to be recycled and how it should be managed and controlled. A well-founded quality assurance programme would definitely increase sustainable recycling of organic wastes. Marketing analysis shows that all users of compost demand a standardised quality product that is supervised by independent organisations. A study in the south of Germany showed that 94% of the commercial users made this precondition. In another German study among citizens of Cologne and Düsseldorf 80 % of the participants would have a more positive attitude towards compost and food grown on arable land with compost application, if they were sure that a quality control system for compost exists. The introduction of separate collection and composting must therefore go hand in hand with the introduction of a quality assurance system. Assuring compost quality is more than just fulfilling a number of heavy metal limit values. It plays a central role and influences all stages of the treatment of organic residues: - Separate collection. Quality assurance can be used to draw conclusions on the quality of the source separation and can introduce measures for improvement; - Plant engineering. Errors in the plant engineering can be quickly identified via quality controls. In the hygienic sector quality assurance also serves to guarantee worker protection; - Compost production. Only constant quality and product checks avoid errors in compost production; - Marketing. Consumers want standardised quality compost. Only a quality assurance system guarantees this. The quality sign as a symbol helps the marketing efforts; - Public relations work. A good image for compost can be built up with assured quality and a quality label; - Application. The analytical results form the basis for the declaration and the recommendations for use and consequently for the correct and successful application of compost; - Product range. Only by precisely knowing the constituents and their width of fluctuation several compost products can be developed; - Politics/legislature. Through statistical evaluation of the test results the legislator is familiar with the present standard of compost and the possibilities of the composting plants and he can issue directives that are appropriate for the current practical situation of the compost quality; - Certification. A quality assurance system is a pre-condition for certifying the composting plants to e.g. the EU-Standard EN ISO The central role of quality assurance is seen in the countries with developed composting system like Austria, Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands and Belgium. These countries have established an extensive quality management for the composting plants, in which around 400 composting plants take part at the moment. Several other countries like Sweden, Norway, Italy and France are in the status of the conceptual design. 7.5 Quality Assurance system Quality assurance schemes for compost and digestion residuals established themselves in the last 15 years successfully in various European Member States and contributed well for the sustainable 83

84 recycling of organic waste. Nevertheless the running revisions of various environmental and agricultural directives at the Commission and the EU free trade principle advice to develop consistent quality standards for compost and digestion residuals Towards a European-wide QUAS The example of the advanced countries clearly shows that effective bio-waste treatment has to include quality standards and their control in order to guarantee environmentally safe application and successful marketing and markets. On the basis of existing experiences in countries with running quality assurance schemes the European Compost Network (ECN)/ORBIT develops at present a European Quality Assurance Scheme (ECN-QAS) for compost. The essential elements of ECN-QAS for compost are shown in Figure 7-2. Figure 7-2. Elements of quality assurance schemes for compost The ECN-QAS defines a common compost standard, which includes minimum quality criteria for compost in defined market sectors. To this purpose, compost is specified as organic soil improver or fertiliser, and as constituent for growing media and potting soils. Minimum requirements for the treatment process, which have to be met in order to achieve the necessary level of aerobic biological activity should be defined by the QAO. The aerobic biological activity should be declared, including the used analytical method. In addition application requirements have to be declared by the compost producer or importer placing the compost on the market. Compost as constituent in growing media additionally has to comply with minimum requirements of electrical conductivity (salt content) and plant response. The ECN-QAS Quality Label can only be applied to compost which successfully meets the corresponding quality requirements. Value giving quality criteria are mainly defined by the content of organic matter, plant nutrients and liming value. Further specifications include physical properties, electrical conductivity and ph. An important criteria for the testing of the suitability for certain uses is the testing of plant response. 84

85 Minimum set of compost properties for declaration National regulations specifying declaration and labelling requirements which interfere with the declaration rules defined in the following table have to be respected accordingly. Quality criteria Soil improvement Fertilising properties Material properties Biological parameters Parameter Dimension Appraisal Organic matter [% DM] 15 %, declaration Liming value (CaO) [% DM] declaration Nitrogen (N) total [% DM] declaration Phosphorus (P) total [% DM] declaration Potassium (K) total [% DM] declaration Magnesium (Mg) total [% DM] declaration Maximum particle size [mm] declaration Bulk density [g/l FM] declaration Dry matter [% FM] declaration Salinity / El. conductivity [ms/m] declaration ph value declaration Aerobic biological activity declaration Plant response declaration Precautionary criteria (limit values) Precautionary compost criteria for consumer and environmental protection are the heavy metal content, the amount of impurities (glass, metals, plastics) and hygienic aspects (Salmonellae; weed seeds). Composting plants awarding for the ECN-QAS Quality Label should meet the limit values set in the ECN-QAS Quality Manual. Independent of the ECN-QAS values the appropriate national thresholds have to be met at all times. In the case of Cu and Zn, the values represent orientation thresholds. If exceeded the measured concentration shall be declared. Precautionary quality Parameter Limit value criteria Hygiene Salmonellae Absent in 25 g dry matter Undesired ingredients Impurities (content) 0,5 % dry matter and properties Weed seeds 2 seeds per liter Inorganic pollutants Lead (Pb) 130 mg kg -1 dry matter Cadmium (Cd) 1.3 mg kg -1 dry matter Chromium (Cr) 60 mg kg -1 dry matter Copper (Cu) 1) 200 mg kg -1 dry matter 2) Nickel (Ni) 40 mg kg -1 dry matter Mercury (Hg) 0.45 mg kg -1 dry matter Zinc (Zn) 1) 600 mg kg -1 dry matter 2) 1) Copper (Cu) and Zinc (Zn) are considered as trace elements. Threshold values above 110 mg Cu kg -1 dry matter and 400 mg Zn kg -1 dry matter must be declared 2) These values represent orientation thresholds Compost analysis The ECN-QAS includes regular sample taking and compost analysis of the relevant quality parameters conducted by independent laboratories. It is recommended on account of long years experiences to have 100 % external sampling. In agreement with the ECN-QAS it can be admitted that up to 50 % of the samples can be taken by the correspondingly educated plant manager. The analytical report and the assessment are delivered directly to the Quality Assurance Organisation (QAO) by the laboratory. The frequency of the investigations during the one year recognition procedure and the subsequent ongoing monitoring procedure depends on treatment capacity. At least four inspections for composting plants with a treatment capacity >4000 ton input material per year should be carried out during the first year of operation - one for every season to asses the 85

86 essential quality characteristics over the course of the year. Generally one sample should be taken every three months. Analytical test methods The European Commission has mandated CEN with the development of horizontal standards (test methods) in the field of sludge, (treated) bio-waste and soil under consideration of the characterisation of waste (Mandate M/330). The test methods are needed in view of upcoming EU Directives. The mandate considers standards on sampling and analytical methods for hygienic and biological parameters as well as inorganic and organic parameters. Consequently the CEN Technical Board (BT) created a BT Task Force (BT/TF 151) Horizontal Standards in the fields of sludge, bio-waste and soil (CEN/BT TF 151). On most sampling and analytical topics, the final consultation and validation of the draft standards has taken place in autumn Until today the final decision on the appropriateness of the standards for treated bio-waste has not taken place. Until horizontal standards elaborated under the guidance of CEN Task Force 151 become available, it is recommended to carry out testing and sampling in accordance with the current test methods developed by Technical committee CEN 223 Soil improvers and growing media. Until no European standards (EN) for methods are required in an EU legislative on bio-waste national test methods and accepted test methods by national provisions may be used. Analysis should be carried out by reliable laboratories that are preferably accredited for the performance of the required tests in an acknowledged quality assurance system QAS in the Netherlands There are two quality brands for compost: - BVOR/VA quality brand for general application in agriculture - RHP quality brand for application in potting soils (substitute peat) BVOR/VA quality brand A quality brand, Keurcompost, is developed by the Dutch waste sectors on bio-waste and green waste composting and which complies with Dutch regulations. 86

87 Table 7-7. Compost quality requirements for Keurcompost Parameter Keurcompost Class I 1 Keurcompost Class II 7 Analysis frequency (number per year) General Dry matter (%) Declaration Declaration Per analysis Organic matter (%) Organic particles >50 mm 0 0 Analysis not obligatory Heavy metals (mg/kg ds) Cadmium Chromium Copper Mercury 0,3 0, Nickel Lead Zinc Arsenic Salt content Chloride (mg/kg ds) Declaration Declaration 6 Electrical conductivity (EC) (ms/cm) Declaration Declaration 6 Nutrients (g/kg ds) Nitrogen (N-total) Declaration Declaration Per batch (max 2000 ton) or per month Phosphate (P 2 O 5 ) Declaration Declaration Per batch (max 2000 ton) or per month Potassium (K 2 O) Declaration Declaration 6 Calciumcarbonate (CaCO 3 ) Declaration Declaration 6 Magnesium (MgO) Declaration Declaration 6 Sulphur (S-total) Declaration Declaration 6 Miscellaneous ph-kcl Declaration Declaration 6 Stability (Oxitop) (mmol O 2 /kg OM/h) Declaration Declaration 2 Weed germs (number/l) Impurities Impurities >2 mm 0,10 % 0,20 % Stones >5 mm (%) 1,00 % 2,00 % Glass 2 20 mm (%) 0,10 % 0,20 % Glass > 20 mm Absent Absent Micro-organisms (bio-waste only) Enterococcen (cfu/gram) E.coli (cfu/gram) Salmonella Absent Absent 4 7 Companies may give their own commercial name to keurcompost (e.g. Recro Keurcompost klasse I) 8 The more the average result is below the requirement, the lower the frequency. 87

88 The certified Keurcompost guarantees: 1. Independent inspection of: - Input materials - Treatment processes - Storage and transport 2. Guaranteed composition of compost (analysis report) 3. Compost tested for the absence of disease germs and weed seeds 4. Compost meets legal compost standards RHP quality brand RHP quality assurance system applies to the use of compost as potting media in greenhouses. The amount of compost allowed to use is max. 20% of the potting medium. Obviously the requirements for RHP compost are much stricter especially the amount of salts in the compost. Specific requirements for compost are not listed here but are presented in the PowerPoint presentation of RHP. 7.6 Positive list of bio-waste suitable for biological treatment The materials listed in Table below are in principle suitable for biological treatment. In case of production of compost, the producer shall put in place the necessary controls on the incoming biowastes to ensure that there is no intentional dilution of polluting substances 9. A complete list of suitable raw material with references to the European Waste Catalogue is given in the Quality Manual of ECN-QAS. Table 7-8. Examples of suitable waste for biological treatment Food waste Garden waste Organic waste from agroindustries - Residues from - Green cuttings (grass) - Residues of food & vegetables for - Pruning and clipping fodder processing preparing and residues including extraction, consuming food (salad, - Leaves pressing, filtering etc. tomatoes, beans, - Wood (untreated; - Perished seed - etc) furniture is excluded) - Residues from animal - Fruit peelings and - Dead plants residues horn, hair, feather and residues (orange, apple, - Flower residues wool - bananas, etc) - Paunch waste - Cooked stuff (potatoes, - Brewery and distillery rice, pasta, soups, etc) residues - Cooked meat and fish - Cacao shells - Egg-shells - Tea bags, coffee filters residue, etc. 9 General Remarks: - Category 2 and 3 animal by-products listed in this annex suitable for biological treatment are also subject to Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002 and 208/2006 laying down health rules concerning animal by-products not intended for human consumption. The material can only be utilised if compatible with the Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002 and 208/2006. Input materials underlying the ABP- Regulation are marked in column remark. - Digestion residues: Digestion residues are suitable for composting, only from the treatment of separately collected biodegradable materials, which are listed as input materials in this annex. Input materials which should be treated anaerobically before composting are indicated in column remark. - Sewage sludge is excluded from the input list and regarded as not suitable for the production of quality compost labelled according to the ORBIT/ECN-QAS. - In order to assess if the used input materials are approved in biological agriculture the specific provisions of the EU Regulation (EC) No. 834/2007 and No 889/2008 must be respected. 88